Shamael: If someone now can explain to me why a camera with a ton more features, with more comfort in use, with better sharpness, but with just a stop lower high ISO performance can get 3 points less then the Nikon D600. D600 AF is the worst Nikon ever made, the camera has quality issues, has not tilt and swivle screen, nor AF range setting for lenses to capture within a certain range, no focus peaking for MF, no composed image shooting for handheld in dark light and, and, and, and. DPR, you become more and more ridiculous.Compared to the A99, the D600 body is a cripple and here the fact the it has 39AF points opposed to 19 is not an excuse. The AF performs better than Nikon D600 AF, the major point where almost all Pro's who use it complain about. So, what on the end justifies this "bad" note compared to D600. Comparing both cameras is comparing a Ferrari to a Volkswagen, Nikon's D600 is primitive and Nikon has not make any effort to make this camera a modern tool, even D5200 offers more.
The D600 performs well but too bad it's built horribly. Focus problems , aperture issues and now shutter lubricant issues leaking all over the sensor. Nikon really missed on this camera. Nikon is very aware of all these major issues and my friends that have bought this cam are getting a big "F.U" from Nikon about replacements. Sure the A99 is a bit more expensive but I would much rather pay a bit more for a camera I can actually use vs one that spends a lot of its life in repair.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review