Somebody puhleeze help me understand. The 7D II is supposed to be awesome in low-light, but yet the low-light sensor rating as tested by DxOMark is not very good as compared to not only latest competition (D7100) but also as compared and stated with older and in some cases entry level models (D3300).
If this camera is being touted as a "mini-5DIII" or as stated a "mini-1Dx" how is this possible?

Possibly a different question, but as an example and using rounded numbers, the 5DIII is low-light rated at 2300 on a FF camera. The 7D MKII is rated at 1082. Isn't the low-light rating sub-par? If the sensor is 40% smaller would not a relative ISO rating be 40% less than the 5DIII or about 1280? Am I seeing this right, or is my math and rationale flawed?
So, is the 7DII awesome as compared only to the 7D? That I could understand a little better.
BTW - I am a Canon user.

Hey, no fair. You can just say I ran, you really must post your time.

Congratulations! I was able to join in the Berlin 1/2, in '91. Unbeleivable organization, but what else would you expect from the Germs. We crossed the location of the wall, I think 3 times. And my time....was the best most enjoyable time I ever had running. Embarrassed to confess, don't recall the time. Then again, never was a fast runner.

Damn, now with suck-ass circulation I am tickled if I ca walk 5 miles, without too many rest stops. My advise run, enjoy and tell the stories often