Instead of your subjective evaluation of looking at a few images which have no detail and somewhat uniform noise, if you look at the quantitative DXOMARK comparison of the EOS 6D Mark ii sensor vs the Sony A7 iii sensor, you can see that Sony has almost 3 Evs better dynamic range and significantly better low light performance:
I see someone doesn't understand DxO's low light score. From the DxO web site:
We have therefore defined low-light ISO as the highest ISO setting for a camera that allows it to achieve a SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits. A difference in low-light ISO of 25% equals 1/3 EV and is only slightly noticeable.
There is a 30.3% difference between the Sony A73's low light score and the Canon 6D2's low light score. That's
less than the half stop I guessed from my "subjective evaluation." DxO is more favorable to the 6D mark II than I was!
Both DxO and I would agree that the difference is
"...only slightly noticeable." I would add that in print, after post processing, you're simply not going to see any difference.
DxO ranks the base ISO DR difference higher than I would, but still close. I would put it at 2-2.5ev scrolling around the DPReview studio scene. DxO claims 2.8ev. NR in post will reduce that difference somewhat, which is why I ranked the 6D2 a
"solid 2 stops behind." With shadow NR in post I would be comfortable pushing most 6D2 files to 3.5 or 4ev and most A73 files to 6ev. This will vary somewhat based on subject/exposure/view size, but for most cases that would probably hold.
I will note that at the edge for either camera you would be better off IQ wise to blend two shots if you're going to print big.
Never the less, +4 is not +6 and the Sony wins this. But I stand by my observation that
most people who cling to this difference while bashing Canon in forums cannot post images illustrating that they actually take advantage of that much shadow latitude. I've had my fill of the DR debate...raging for a decade now...because all I see are words and not pictures. It's no different to me than a Porsche owner arguing with a Ferrari owner over track specs when neither one of them have ever been to a track or had their cars over 90mph.
For years I shot landscapes and even real estate interiors on a 7D
mark I (2.5-3ev shadow latitude with post NR). I know how often a single frame worked. I know how often a single frame did not work. And out of the times a single frame was not enough, I know how many scenes would have blown out even an A73 or D850. How many scenes had to have 2-3 blended exposures regardless of sensor. The Sony DR advantage is not the issue it is made out to be.
Finally: this entire conversation is based on the assumption that the RP will have the 6D2's sensor. If Canon moved ADCs on chip then it will likely match the 5D IV and R in DR. The measured 1ev difference between the 5D IV and Sony's best is inconsequential in a world of post processing and NR.