Excellent write up, and it matches my experience with my D800 and 5D MK III sensors. The D800 sensor is supurb at low ISO settinngs below 400, while my 5D MK III pulls away at high ISO settings.
Since I do mostly extreme low light photography, I was disappointed with the D800 performance in low light, but amazed when I used ISO 100.
The thing that is not touched on, are the aspects of a camera system.
Service (time and quality for repairs)
Lens quality and available focal lengths that match sensor resolution.
There are other personal preference things like ergonomics, ease of use which tend to vary with user background.
He did touch on the issues with editing of large raw files, but a lot of people do not know exactly how to quantify this. I found it taking multiple times to render a low light D800 image compared to a 5D MK II image, and running NR or other computation intensive processes was very slow when you were trying to process 500 or more images.
i have them, after 12800iso the 5dmk3 is better regarding signal/noise. now the 800 is not aimed to be a high iso camera but does it rather well
At the time I ought it last May, I fell for the supurb high ISO pitch that was going around. I found that at ISO 800 and above, noise started to show up. I took a large number of images with it at ISO 12800 in very low light. The reduced High ISO DR is a problem for all cameras at very high ISO, but I was disappointed with the D800.
I also was disappointed in my Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 G, it may have just been a problem lens, but the CA was horrible. I like to use live view and tether my cameras, this turned out to be another Nikon weak point, the screen was very slow to update makiing manual focus difficult.
All those things and a lot more were overlooked in the hype. I see it as a wonderful camera for landscape shooters, but nothing special for high ISO use.