Originally posted by DSims For better or worse, most people don't consider a camera modern unless it has the high-ISO capabilities of a CMOS sensor. While this capability may be slightly overrated compared to how much it's needed in everyday photography, it is essential in many situations, so this is not a flippant requirement. I expect the sales of the 645Z will far exceed that of its predecessor, as long as some "better" alternative doesn't appear soon.
Well, as long as the high ISO doesn't bring any disadvantages at low ISO compared to the old generation, no one would see a problem there. But the same pictures published by photorumors don't show the same crispiness and the same amount of finest details as I am used by my 645D. I looking at them in 100% size, they look similar like the ones taken using a D7000/K5 sensor (off course at a different size, but that doesn't matter if you watch both at 100%). No noise visible, but lacking the finest details. The 645D shows all the finest details, but off course also has some minor amount of noise, even at ISO 100.
Off course these are early sample images and quite often they are technically quite bad. Let's hope the 645z is better than the pictures shown. Otherwise, the customer group will change. It will be people like the one that sold my 645D after using it just a few months. This guy was looking for an universal, high quality DSLR. And found out the 645D was restricting him too much from an ISO point of view. He wasn't looking for a camera optimized for ISO 100 to 200. In other words: Not for digital medium format - not in the sense of sensor size, but in the sense of picture quality being optimized for resolution, not for universal use at high ISO, too.