Beercan on a900 vs. Hasselblad 150mm Prime on H1-P30

Dear a900 enthusiasts:

In my previous threads I compared central resolution and noise of the a900 to the Hasselblad H1 with P30 back using various lenses. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=29852201 and http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=29778684 This generated a lot of discussion both in the Sony threads and over at Luminous-landscape and getDPI.com . Some were surpised that the a900 was so competitive with the Hasselblad digital system. But perhaps this should not be so surprising becuase their is only a small difference in the number of pixels across the width, and the actual physical width:
Sony a900: 6048 pixels in 35.9mm
Phase One P30: 6496 pixels in 44.2mm

Therefore differences in resolution would be expected mainly from lens differences, and from the a900 anti-aliasing filter (the H1 does not have one). Since aliasing artifacts including Moire are prominent in the images of both cameras, it appears that the a900 filter is appropriately weak, and that helps the a900 competitively when a top quality lens is used.

This test compares the Minolta Beercan lens (70-210mm f4) against a the Hasselblad 150mm f3.2 Prime lens.

Here is the test: http://www.dboyd.com/Photos_08/HasselbladvsSony/test@150mmvsBeercan/test.htm

You may pick up the raw files for your own testing here: http://www.dboyd.com/Photos_08/HasselbladvsSony/test@150mmvsBeercan/
This should make the MFDB folks happier.