Oh, and here's yet another wedding image I was processing from my 5D3 that I decided to throw out b/c by the time I corrected the 3EV vignetting of my 24/1.4 and then added 1.5 stops (b/c I underexposed by 1.5 EV to save the sky/clouds above my subjects), I had this wonder junk overlaid over my image
Maybe you should learn to convert and process your files properly.
I always thought wedding photographers make use of reflectors to avoid such classic lighting problems? That was what my wedding photographer did to get a beautifully exposed shot with the sunburst and blue sky behind us. Oh, he was using the Canon 5D classic.
Oh, here is another example: http://www.mattgranger.com/light. Matt has mostly Nikon gear.
You are absolutely right, except that generally those here suggesting the Exmor tech can do a better job don't want to be bothered with fill, they want to be able to use every ounce of the extensive latitude in the Nikon file.
They will of course will be lifting data that has recorded virtually no light, so the photographer using 'old' tech such as a 5D or D200 and sound technique will produce a much higher quality image.
So what happens if you use sound technique with both Canon and Nikon ? You get pretty much the same image. A well lit and correctly exposed image will always triumph over the same one which has been poorly lit and under exposed.