Here is a LR4.1 RC version.(100% crop)
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
From that review, it is this page:
That is most interesting. Why?
Because about half way down, they take the same shot from the D800/5D3 and 100% crop of the shadows.
The image from the Canon sensor is as noisy as all hell (splotchy? banded?) whereas the Nikon one is noise free. That tells me that Canon still haven't fixed the noise issues that were integral with the 5D2.
All that post did was make me go test my lowly 5D2 the same way, push shadows the same degree, and conclude one of two things:
Either Lightroom totally blows chunks,
FM is not a site I will be visiting again due to lack of credibility.
Sorry, but recovering shadows with Capture One 6 gave me very pleasing results with 5D2 with none of the artifacts I see on the FM post. The D800 is better than what I get from my 5D2, but the difference is nothing even remotely like what is posted on that site.
I won't be a fan of in camera HDR until it lets you save the result as a raw-file or .tiff.
All that data reduced to a mere jpeg won't cut it for me.
I will continue to blend my files manually.
Someone on here said it best, "When all this hype has died down in two years 90% of pros will be shooting with the 5D3 over the D800, just like the 5D2 over and D700 and all Canon over Nikons"
Who wrote that? Nostradamus?
Guys, if you put the ISO argument to one side you've still been annihilated on dynamic range, colour depth etc. Oh, and let's not forget price.
And your arguments regarding the DX0 Mark tests, bias etc. If the shoe was on the other foot, you lot would be putting the boot into Nikon and praising DX0 Mark for their testing techniques.