Going for D600 or keeping mirrorless for the GH3?

Thank you!

Actually except for the salt flats photo all of these are single exposures, no stacking or HDR merging. As for the salt flats photo that would have been a multiple exposure on any camera since multiple exposures over a few minutes and hand blending were needed to get even color across the clouds.

I understand what you are saying, but really it again comes down to size. DR and SNR are really a function of print size. So indeed if I want to print large and not have to stack exposures I'll of course be better served by FF. And this is even more true with Nikon/Sony FF - they have excellent base ISO performance and a low base ISO so not only do I get the sensor size advantage as expected but for landscapes I also get a lower base ISO as well.

As a side note I actually tend to find DR as a landscape specification is overrated. That is rarely the problem for me with a smaller format. Usually the best lighting in landscape is not very high contrast, and often when it is high contrast trying to extract shadow detail doesn't end up being the best compositional option. Clipped shadows are often desirable in high contrast scenes. I find more often I'm increasing contrast (reducing DR) in post processing than the other way around.

What is more often an issue is SNR in the mid-tones. Many landscapes, especially then sky, have wide swaths of subtle color and tonal variations. m43 with the small sensor combined with a relatively high base ISO has much more trouble doing "smooth" than FF. If anything ends up requiring post processing work to deal with sensor limitations that's almost always what it is - mid-tones - not the shadows - for me at least. And again, relates to print size, only an issue if I'm trying to print or display big. And certainly if you have a nice shot you'd like to print it big so there definitely is a compromise between m43 and FF for landscapes.

--
Ken W
See profile for equipment list