Not claiming any scientific truth here, just comparing what the 5DmII can do versus the a77 with the same length lens. Yes, I could have used a zoom on the Canon or Sony using the appropriate focal lengths, but that is a different test. If money was no object I would own the Canon 5DmII for personel use, but the Sony is $1300 less than what I paid for the 5DmII, seems like a good trade off to me. The big advantages of the Sony in terms of fps and continuous focusing I have not made much use of yet, but the image quality is great. The new Canon 1D X is also better than the a77 in many ways but after playing with my brothers Nikon D3, I do not think I really want to go to that big a body, not that it would fit in my budget anyway.
Sometimes people claim an advantage for crop bodies when taking long shots as you get a little more apparent magnification for the same length lens. In this test, for these two cameras, with these three lenses, at the detail level that was true. Looking at the full images, up to the size of my computer screen, I like the Canon image better as far as color and contrast, but it was close to the Minolta Macro lens.