That kind of bullsh*t is what really ticks me off about this whole debate. The exposure there (f/11 @ ISO 100!!!!!) is OBVIOUSLY botched to intentionally create a scenario where you have to lift the entire shot out of the shadows. Expose the damnable thing properly, and you won't HAVE to lift any shadows! NO ONE does what those photos demonstrate in the real world. It is entirely unrealistic, a bogus scenario to create a comparison that purposely puts Canon sensors in the worst light possible. It is entirely possible to create a photograph with a Canon camera at a wider aperture that looks every bit as good as the D800 photo...and in real life, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE DONE...at a WIDER aperture.
DON'T BUY INTO THIS LOAD OF BULL, PPL!
yeah your posting is bullS___.. because you don´t get HIS posting.
i don´t need a porsche that drives 290 km/h.
because in real life i never would drive 290 km/h and in america i would not even be allowed to drive 290 km/h.
still arguing that a VW Golf is a s good as a Porsche GT3, when driving at normal speeds.... is wrong.
even when i don´t use all resources of a porsche (or a camera) all the time... i still have them when i need them.