Wow, whatever you want a result to be is the right answer I guess.... If you don't think 2+2=4 makes sense just find some book that says it = 8 and then that is your truth. Don't like evolution, just make something up that fits your belief. etc.
DxO has demonstrated a lot of bias with the D800 results and greater than physically possible DR numbers (for "print", as they call it...their "screen" DR numbers are still within the realm of reason and physical possibility). That, combined with the fact that numbers
are only a small factor in a decision to buy a particular piece of gear, doesn't change anything, regardless of how DxO (one of many reviewers) rates the 5D III. Vested Canon users are still going to buy Canon. It'll be the same regarding the 1D X whenever DxO slaps up some numbers for that as well. The amount of effort you put into this thread is a little sad (you should seriously spend the time you would otherwise spend hitting the refresh button on DxO's site out photographing something somewhere). You were apparently just waiting for the day to prove, once and for all, that Canon cameras suck donkey balls
and you were right and everyone else is just a raging buffoon idiotically using inferior cameras that are incapable of properly utilizing the bottom 3 bits of DR. Dude...you posted 7 times in a row trying to prove a point that doesn't really matter...lighten up man!
(Unless you have OCD or something that literally doesn't let you drop the issue...in which case, sorry for all the harassment.)Bottom line:
Its a camera, it takes awesome photos with great IQ (just like the previous generation of all Canon cameras), millions of people will enjoy it and create fantastic artwork with it, millions more people will ENJOY the artwork created with the 5D III, and the world will keep on turning. Whether it beats the competition in a numbers game or not (especially one that seems more and more to be thoroughly biased in favor of a major sponsor and/or against a non-sponsor) is not what matters.