Up until the D3x, the D800 and the D3200 Canon had the march on Nikon at every price point regarding MP, and usually feature set.
while I agree with many of your other points ... I see this one differently.
For me, Nikon passed Canon somewhat earlier: with the D3 and D300. Whereas the preceding generation of D2h/X were crop only and along with the D200 sensor-wise way below Canon, D3 and D300 for the first time were clearly superior to the Canon counterparts at the time.
Canon partially recovered with the 7D, since Nikon did not come out with a worthy D400 until now. But D7000 and now D3200 pulled ahead even further in terms of sensor-quality.
And while Canon did only manage marginal improvements in the 5D 3 sensor over the 5D2, Nikon came out with the D800, leaving everything else in the dust in terms of resolution and DR - not only at base ISO but all the way upt to about ISO 3200. D4 and 5D3 take it only from there.
If Nikon's D600 trounces the 5D3 even at high ISO and comes at the rumored "bargain price", Canon will be in really deep sh*t across their entire product portfolio.
It is really beyond me, why Canon choses to invest scarce R&D, time and money to bring out a 4k video cam in the shape of the 1D C ... and not simply as a much more video-suitable C### cine-cam. Why as a clearly sub-optimal DSLR with mirror, prism and OVF in the way of video capture?
The d3 was an expensive camera that 99% of people couldn't afford nor want to lug around. On the other hand, canon 5Dc was still selling like hot cakes because of its FF at low cost. When the d700 was released, the legendary canon 5D2 stole the show until the d800 release.
As for the d300, the 7D did get around to it but alittle late to the show.