A 2% difference.
Well, if that's not grasping at straws, what is?
When it's less than 1% or not measurable.
Or in other words, Canon seems to be ignoring the photographer and going for the consumer (which kind of agrees with your statement above.)
Oh, I see. Consumers don't care about IQ, but Photographers do, so they should all be using Nikon. Wait, did I say that? Somehow, I don't think so...
If you think Nikon has better sensor DR because they aren't 'ignoring the photographer', you're being terribly naive. Canon and Nikon are publically traded companies. Neither of them 'care about photographers' except insofar as photographers are consumers that buy their products. Canon and Nikon care about profit. In some countries (the US being one), it goes beyond caring - publically held compaines are legally obligated to maximize profit. Canon just seems to be doing a better job at that, based on corporate reports.
Let me put it another way. Nikon is approaching the problem of maximising profit by providing products that give maximum benefit to the photographer that cares about the quality of their photograph in the belief that this is the #1 priority for camera purchases. Canon approaches the problem by adding bells and whistles that attract people whilst delivering a camera with a "good enough" attitude to photography itself.
It's not that it is poor but rather that there has been no improvement and it isn't as if there are no problems that need fixing.
No, there are problems that you want fixed (and so do I, admittedly). Important distinction. But they can clearly outsell Nikon despite those 'problems' so the only voice that matters - the market - has decided there no need to fix anything.
Right, because the majority of the people buying the cameras are consumers and not photographers.
How many nikon shooters do you know and what do they shoot? Of the nikon shooters I know who shoot weddings, only a few of them have the d800 (and the biggest dislike is the file size, second dislike is that things get mushy after ISO 6400). Most are shooting the d700, and if they upgrade its to a d3 or a d3s. Most will say the d800 is a fine camera but the files are much too large - most of them wanted the d800 to be more like the d700, or should I say - the 5d3...modest and easy to manage file sizes and good low light performance. So I don't think that really fits in with you standpoint of:
"Let me put it another way. Nikon is approaching the problem of maximising profit by providing products that give maximum benefit to the photographer that cares about the quality of their photograph in the belief that this is the #1 priority for camera purchases. Canon approaches the problem by adding bells and whistles that attract people whilst delivering a camera with a "good enough" attitude to photography itself."
I'd put it this way - Nikon is attempting to increase its market share by offering a product that is different than it's competition, it occupies a niche that current cannons can't touch. It has a WOW factor with the unusally high MP count, which is something that turns heads - and they most likely offered it at a significantly lower profit margin because they are playing catch up. Canon on the other hand did their research and determined that other features were more important to their users than DR and resolution - high ISO, improved AF, and with the 1dx fps).
Now that's on the higher end of both companies products ---you brought up the 650d and how you overheard someone say they wanted it because it has a touch screen! Well, isn't that what the rebel-the xxd market is?
Even from a professional photgraphers standpoint looking in at my potential clients, big prints are nice but most just want web friendly digital files. So these bells and whistles that you criticize are exactly what the average upgrading from my phone to a real camera want. I got scolded here for appearing to be condescending because I called this out ---fact is most people - nikon buying or canon buying - that are buying these lower level dslr's will most likely be shooting in live mode, auto everything. Most will find using the OVF odd and weird. Most will not know what an AF point is. Most will lose their manual. Most will have a kit lens and thats that! Is that a bad thing? No, because for what most users need it's good enough - whether is an entry level canon, nikon, pentak, olympus, sony, etc ,etc ,etc. Most of these people want nice pics of their kids in the yard, or at the birthday parties or their school play. Most will never visit a site like this for more information. Most will never have heard of DXO, most will not have any clue what a histogram is, most will not view MTF charts....
I get that your disgruntled with canon, but come on man. Give it a rest...