jrista, for what it´s worth, I totally agree! Canon is behind and they should take us more seriously. I have never understood the enormous urge some have to defend Canon for their sensor quality. We should stand shoulder to shoulder and make sure Canon is aware of what we think.
You guys are so vehemently against anyone saying anything negative about Canon that you readily stoop to twisting peoples words, or handily assuming they said something other than they did, then repeating those assumptions as though they are fact. I'm a Canon fan myself, I'm just sick and tired of their nasty crappy read noise. I literally cannot wait for Canon to produce a better sensor (something I believe they are more than capable of doing)...I really want them to improve their sensor IQ, but I'm done waiting.
It is like someone defending his old, slow, unstable, back wheel drive, 3 speed, monster V8, with 10 miles/gallon, no sound proofing and a rotten air-condition, against a fast, 4-wheel drive, 8 speed, hybrid, quiet car, with climate zones and 60 miles/gallon, because it is flat where I live and fuel is cheap and I don´t want to be caught speeding and the roads are pretty straight and it never gets really hot ...
IF Canon had delivered the D800 sensor performance and not Nikon. I am confident that we would have seen loads of posts here, praising Canon for the sensor performance and ridiculing the poor sods in the Nikon camp.
I was inches away from getting the Pentax 645z this summer. I didn´t, for three reasons. I was (unrealistically) hoping for a d810 basher at Photokina, I am a bit skeptical to the Pentax lens lineup and I don´t want to carry more equipment on a trip. But my patience is running thin.
That is not an appropriate analogy. The 'defence' of the current Canon sensors only begins when someone claims that the Exmor has basically made the Canon redundant overnight, and that the Canon is 'only suitable for landscapes up to 10x8', or 'posting on Facebook', or 'noise / banding is so bad I can't use the camera'.
In normal use, at low ISO, there is simply no difference. In the scheme of things very few people want to lift shadows by three stops. In fact I would go so far as the say the tonal graduation on the 1Dx is probably better. Certainly within the professional business of photography in which I deal the general concessus was that in the days of the D3x Nikon had the edge on pure 'IQ'. Opinion has generally changed since the arrival of the 1Dx.
If you are looking to realise more image quality than can be produced by your 1Dx I would strongly advise looking at the Pentax 645z rather than a D810. I wouldn't worry too much on the lenses because once you own the camera you will establish when and where you use it and I think you will find the lenses are OK. Also you could adapt the many Pentax 67 lenses, though don't expect ultra sharp images.