WOW. Talk about missing the point.
I know I probably should have started a new tread with my post and I know I did not give the OP any answers to his questions.
But it was just some thoughts about all this noise about comparing cameras in MFDB treads.
Sounds sort of legitimate in this thread
since comparing the image quality is the very point, is it not?
On your point, we all have our most fun gear to shoot with, it would be an Ebony 4x5 camera as far as I am concerned. Now, when I need to produce images, I have reached the painful conclusion that the only upside my Ebony has resultwise (meaning in the images produced) compared to a [D800 with the right lens + stitching] for my landscaper needs is... movements... For the rest it is behind in every compartment (again, in terms of images produced), including looks, creativity of produced images, image quality, dynamic,...
But now... photography is only part of my life, I can afford not to have as much fun with it as I could when I shoot. I guess you see things differently when shooting is all you do.
This debate was had a thousand times, but the take away still seems biased. Everybody agrees with you really, I am indeed not aware of any DSLR shooter unaware that MF has tens of reasonably arguable objectives values (fun to shoot with being potentially one of those) compared to a D800. Doug had come up with a very good itemized list highlighting these a couple of months ago.
The only aspect some argue about is the supposed clear superiority in terms of image quality of equipment costing 5 times too much. Interestingly, this is the very point the OP wanted to discuss.
But then, we are all fishing for something, aren't we?