Yes, but perfect exposure with low-speed trees is not the same ball game as sometimes high-speed street photography where lighting and opportunities are measures in seconds or fractions thereof. This is why with the MM you have a choice of either significantly underexposing most frames so as not to clip highlights in those few where there is no time to introduce accurate negative compensation. In scenic application, of course one can expose perfectly for each frame with any camera, including multiple exposures and blending in post, if required (as it often is with Canon cams).
When shooting film, my entire technique revolved around never losing shadows as highlights rolled off nicely and could be dealt with in development to some extent. Increasing overexposure was not really an issue, but I agree that with digital once you are blown you are blown. However, if there is not enough time to get each shot right, one can introduce negative compensation and adjust exposure in post. Sure, you lose some quality, but usually very little and is more than made up for by being slick and quick and thus having more interesting frames committed on your card. The more DR your camera has, the more readily one can strategically place exposure with little penalty during adjustments in post.
Perfect exposure is nice in theory, but is rarely the whole solution when doing demanding 'fast' work. Smart metering is now more important than ever before as some cameras are far better at ensuring they never clip than others. This is the MM's main failing: the metering is a far bigger issue than the lack of highlight recovery, because if the cam adjusted exposure down enough, you could just lift exposure and hold highlights in post!
