You keep putting words in my mouth, arguing with points I didn't make. I don't have time to correct all of this. So just a few examples of how you twist things to make your point:
"2. To say now that Canon is behind on a certain aspect of sensors that that aspect could only ever matter to tech addicts sounds suspiciously like a fanboy making excuses and tossing cheap insults." —— I didn't say that. I said DR is adequate for many photographers, including some of the best. If someone finds DR so lacking they should of course switch brands. With a healthy market for used equipment, that's easier to do than ever.
Hah, you do realize I was responding to.... Alrik? And right in my very message was quoted: "Only tech-addicted photographers give a krapp about sensors - their clients don't, except they are tech-addicts as well."
And then you blast me for twisting your words and making stuff up?
I wasn't twisting your words since I wasn't even responding to you in that post
. Second, the very thing about tech-addicted addicts was a direct quote right there for you to see.
"You also realize that by far and away most of the people that started asking for more DR only because of limitations they found in the field not in some lab right?" Perhaps, but some of those in the field can't seem to avoid getting underexposed birds against a bright sky — such a basic photographer error. The same for a mammal running into the woods. Having that happen "in the field" doesn't prove or validate a sensor deficiency. This are common photographic situations since the invention of photography, and photographers have addressed them with exposure adjustments rather than blaming them on a sensor "problem".
1. you are picking one little scenario and acting like that is everything and has nothing to do with the claims of the others that only people who never get out to shoot outside of a lab care
2. if the bird is super backlit sometimes the only way to expose it well it to blow out the sky and other stuff, which may or may not matter, if it does then....
3. as I said, if you had a camera that could make something out of a shot where you didn't have time to adjust, something out of the blue popped up and it was a one second chance with no time to set, why not want a camera that for the first time in the photographic era could rescue such a shot?
4. what if it is running in and out sun beams in the woods and you wanted to get both directly lit and shaded shots and be free to pick from all frames, no way to flip dials fast enough, not the end of the world, not the most common scenario, but why not desire a sensor where you could get around that much more easily?
those are mostly side issues though
"Nothing wrong with trying to make a big push to wake Canon up so we don't have to wait another decade to get such expanded possibilities ..." I don't see a big push to "wake" Canon up. Instead I see people complaining about something that they could easily address by changing brands. They claim DR is so important that they would choose a Sony sensor over a Canon sensor "any day", and yet they keep using Canon. So that "any day" apparently hasn't come yet. I'm sure Canon is quite "awake", but they have to deal with diverse priorities and their own timetable for development.
why shouldn't we want them to up the time table? how the heck does it do anything positive for you for them to keep milking away the old sensor line? so why defending their sacred honor to the ends of the earth? they sure don't do that for you, they try to get away with absolutely the least they can for the most money they can.
As I wrote above, photographers can always use more of everything, including DR. But DR isn't the be all and end all of image quality. (Clearly, if you are still using Canon, then you agree on some level.) Photographers can use more of absolutely everything — higher shutter speeds, longer battery life, wider apertures, lighter cameras, stronger cameras, more waterproof cameras, more flash power, more sensitive sensors, quieter shutters, bigger viewfinders, faster autofocus, more responsive cameras ... anything you can think of. That doesn't mean that all existing cameras have a "problem" or "deficiency".
Well it does mean the Canon have a deficiency in DR. And the title of this thread was talking about sensors not overall systems.