When I see your continuous stream of answers trying to prove the same point again and again and the time you must take to produce these flashing comparisons I wonder what is wrong with you.
Yes, one can recover underexposed shadows with a Sony sensor. I know, I have been doing so for the past 4 years.
Now you have me really puzzled.
You correctly bring up the point that how you use large dynamic range to move and fit it into the display medium, be it a monitor or a print.
You go on to say that this was traditionally a strong point of MF cameras, and I agree on that because there was a time when they had more dynamic range than
other formats. You then go on to say that that does not mean that Nikon/Canon/Sony can't do that. On this I agree to a certain point.
Canon unfortunately currently is not quite up there with the Sony/Nikon sensors... as a result I chose to move (in part) from Canon to Nikon.
What really puzzles me is why does a visual example of what you are saying upset you and make you think something is wrong with me?
You question the time I spend making the example...... It probably took me less time to take that example, load it into photoshop and export an animated gif.
After all don't they say an image is worth a thousand words?
alosurdo stated he is on the fence regarding the d800e, but is not sure. He also said that one of the main things he is looking for is dynamic range in the shadows.
I posted the example for him. If I recall correctly I have not posted an example I have taken of shadow recovery, just highlight recovery.