A lot of denial in the forum about inferiority of Canon's sensors. The knee jerk argument is that Dxomark:
1) is biased, or
2) their tests are bad because "I" get superior results out of my Canon, unlike "my" Nikon friend who is struggling, or
3) is meaningless because I can bracket and get high DR, so low DR is not big deal
DXOMarks is simply giving empirical evidence to the inferiority of Canon's decade old tech versus modern tech of Sonikon. If we as Canon consumers (whether we like the brand or, more importantly, stuck to it due to sunk costs) live in denial, Canon has no incentive to improve. Result? we get shafted while competition has better cameras. Period!
The problem with DxO's scoring is that it doesn't match what I can see with my own eyes
. Last year I shot two Canon 5D Mark II's and two Nikon D7000's. The Canon is in a higher price category, but DxO actually scores the D7000 higher:
Canon 5D Mark II score = 79
Nikon D7000 score = 80
So the D7000 sensor is better, right? Not at all. Just compare the color in portraits
from each camera and judge which one shows humans looking more like actual humans
. The 5D Mark II's won easily; the D7000's were actually worse in color and more prone to blowing highlights. Of course, that result is to be expected based on the rather big price difference, but DxO would have you believe the those cameras' sensors are a close match and that the D7000's is a tiny bit better. Well, they are very wrong.
So whatever DxO is measuring, they aren't measuring everything that's important to me or scoring in a way that matches my experience. I heard a similar experience from a wedding photographer who had moved to a higher end Nikon and missed the color of his 5D Mark II.