A99 tested on DXO - score: 89

Holy Smokes I would have never went and looked it up but what a thrashing, but honestly folks its what we all knew even us Sony owners. The d800 is hands down the best performing camera on the market and the d600 is hands down the best value in full frame. Sony has to take a real look at themselves their 24mp FF gets absolutely trounced by their faster to market 36mp Nikon counter part.....um then same Sony camera gets trounced again by a camera costing half its price and using its own sensor.... So they cant compete in resolution, resolution to noise, or just low light performance period much less focusing modes, points, and metering yet they want to charge you more than the camera of the year and twice the other camera on the market with its very own sensor? Its not going to work...I would not have looked DxO charts up but once just has to do some reading and browsing to know the Nikon d800 and its d600 brethern are absolutely game changers one for resolving detail in a performance oriented body while seemingly IMPROVING low light performance over its predecessor the other offering outstanding low light and overall IQ in an affordable upgrade path using a smaller more appealing consumer sized body.....they are BOTH spot on and Sony cant ignore either of them anymore...... Instead of pontificating about why these technical test arent the measure of a camera ect, ask yourself how a 36mp camera is trouncing a 24mp one in low light and how Nikon can bring to market the same sensor with better performance for half the price in the other......DxO may very well be taken to literally and not indicative of real world performance but we all know the d800 is not just the camera of the year its the best ever at that price range and a game changer in terms of price, performance, and resolution Sony should be ashamed to think they can charge more....the d600 just throws salt in the wound......WE know the Sony a99 sensor can be packaged and sold for $1500 body ( based on the d600 with 24-85 kit price subtracting lens ) and we know the a99 electronics and body can be sold for $1300 ( essentially a scaled a77 or should we say an a77 with the d600 sensor ) where is the additional $1500 cost over the a77 actually manifesting itself?

Nikon has embarrassed Sony on almost all fronts, the d800 is the MP king that while providing substantial resolution increases seems to be able to STILL exceed their competition in low light while providing a robust body and everything that comes with AF and metering modules ( Dynamic 21pt assist is no joke folks ) and the D600 just absolutely steals the lightweight affordable consumer upgrade path......I am only talking about stills here, I guess if your heavily invested in AF video ( but isnt there a snafu with that on the a99 )...I guess if I and those of us insisting the a99 SLT feature set doesnt warrant a premium over the camera of the year then they will fly off the selves at their current prices and make us all look stupid.....i suspect Sony apologist and a99 early adopters will be the ones ultimately hurt in this debate....the a99 will drop drastically and soon or it will drop out of existence...sometimes you just got to eat your poop sandwich in a world where the d800 and d600 dont exist as is...they might could charge $3000 for an a77 with a FF sensor but unfortunately for them they do exist and your competition sets your prices as well......

Now I own a lot of Sony equipment so im not jaded but we have to be honest the a99 isnt the camera the d800 is period.....I mean the d800 can even be used to exceed D7000 performance in DX mode at almost the same resolution but with improved metering, focusing, and focus point arrangement not to mention the 1.2 crop mode I hear is what most are using for wildlife.....but any reasonable person would conclude you cant expect to charge more for the a99 than the d800. I hear you about the SLT feature set trust me I have an a77 and a55 but we ALREADY pay for that in sensor performance we shouldnt have to factor in loss of performance plus a price premium as well.....Another guy hit it on the head for me personally the articulating screen is the sticking point ( im prefer the EVF in non action use but can live with or without it when comparing to big bright FF viewfinders ) but here is the bad news look at the 5200 it has an articulating screen its reasonable to expect the d7xxx/d400 will too......so that for me personally will be the last obstacle to moving....

That said the a99 is a GREAT camera I know it must be as its a more responsive full frame version of the a77 ( which i own ) with image quality that far exceeds most of our requirements and less features stripped such as tethering. Its a great photographic tool and one thing I can say about Sony is I have had many of their cameras and NEVER had a problem with any of them ( if you dont count sluggish response and stripping tethering out of the a77 ) but have had problems with every one I purchased from Canon and Nikon. I prefer Sony menu layout and function manipulation. I use focus peaking even in stills and cant live without the articulating screen due to my disabilities....all im saying is its a bit arrogant to expect your customers to pay MORE for a camera that has less MP, IQ, Auto ISO features, AF module control and presets, and low light performance when we are already paying for the SLT feature set in reducing image quality THAT was supposed to be the trade off for the SLT feature set but make it CHEAPER to produce not MORE expensive......Im in an a99 for a850 cost because thats how it stacks up to the competition....maybe im wrong and sony is selling a99's like hot cakes at their current pricing but I highly doubt it in fact if they dont change their stance soon they will kill the a mount with their stubbornness. We all KNOW Sony and REALIZE the SLT benefits but honestly how many people are walking into stores and getting shown and absorbing this? In contrast to say I like this Sony but the Nikon is 36MP and well its a NIKON......who really walks out with the Sony be honest with yourself? Then there is the lady getting up sold to full frame who liked the Sony ( or insert whatever vendor ) after hearing the sales pitch she says but I cant afford $4500 for camera and lens combo....and the clerk says how about $1900 for the SAME exact sensor but that makes better pictures with a matching lens and I  will have you walking around shooting photos with a pro quality full frame sensor and lens for under 2k boom little Jenny hasnt ever looked so good on stage and your gonna be just as good as the pros with your nikon full frame......dont snicker this scenario plays out 1000 times a day....SO WHO WHO really goes in and pays the same or double for the Sony.....there are some knowledgeable sales staff and consumers like us that would weigh it out or already invested but NOT enough to keep a system afloat.....I would like to see the numbers of consumers stepping into full frame the first time with no current full frame lens lineup using the d600 vs the a99. Nikon just had a brilliant 2012 they out muscled the top spot and stole the value one to boot.....which is fine all the glory to them but its a little disrespectful to ask your patrons to pony up more dollars than the competition who just trounced you when you KNOW the crowd buying are not casual photographers and KNOW the real deal.......

--
Shawn
Nikon D7000 w Sig 150-500 OS
Sony a77/16-50mm( Wife ) HVL56AM
Sony a55 ( daughter )
Tamron 60mm F2 Macro
Sigma 10-20mm
Tamron 90mm Macro
Minolta 28-75 F2.8 Japan
Tamron 70-200 F2.8 Di