The dynamic range of a digital camera depends on one's acceptance of the noise. In turn, the acceptance often depends on the setting: one is accepting more noise in a very low-light setting, like a night stage shot than in a daylight landscape.
Thus it is not reasonable to talk about a specific number as if the DR would be something universal measurement.
Add to this, that the appearance of the noise too is a factor; think of the 5D2's pattern noise.
Noise and Dynamic Range (DR) are two different issues. It is commonly acknowledged that film negatives have about 12-13 EV vs digital at around 9-9.8 give or take, as far as DR is concerned. If your argument is correct, then it would be best for me to use a digicam to shoot wide EV subjects because most sensors have clean ISO 800. That same ISO 800 would be very grainy with film. Even today's ISO 400 film is grainy. Now does that mean film has less DR?
DR, for me, is the range of values where a media is able to render the dark and light areas in an image. A medium with a good DR renders these light and dark areas in such as way as to preserve the detail and render the transition from one EV to the next smoothly or "gracefully," so that the eyes do not see a harsh boundary where the transition from one EV to the next happened. A good medium also allows for a wider range of values so that it allows for brighter and the darker scenes to be "seen" and captured but still retain detail. The image captured can have noise, but if it can "see" those details in and render them "gracefully" from one value to the other, then one can say that the medium has a good DR.
In all these, noise is not the issue.
--
--------------------
'Always in the process of changing, growing, and transforming.'
