I believe that DxOMark either can't fully decode the CR2 file using their own software, are nothing more than a Nikon marketing shill, or both.
You don't need DxO to tell you that 5D3 has shitty shadow noise and banding. Its DR is sufficient if you can nail the exposure, shoot JPG, and post online, however.
Interesting. I've been shooting with the 5D Mark III since April and I have not noticed those issues with RAW files and printing. Hmmm, guess I got the only good copy.
5D3's IQ is same as 5D2's. Good photographers can take any equipment and make them look good. But 5D3 itself has no IQ improvement over its 4 year old predecessor. Fact.
Not sure I claimed it did?? I bought the 5D Mark III after having a 5D Mark II for a long time due to the myriad of improvements over the Mark II. IQ wasn't one of them. I'm not getting your point?
It looks like you are content with 5D2's IQ. Others like myself are not. My point is that people are showing their denial and even blaming DxO for not giving their 5D3 a good IQ score. The fact remains, IQ wise(which I personally consider the HEART of a camera), 5D3 has no improvement, thus a failure in my opinion. That is not to say that good photographers cannot take awesome shots. They have and will continue to do so.
I wonder what you did back in the 2001-2002 era when these sensors and cameras were unheard of. Photography I suppose was just all crap?