[JinDesu]

Lets see, 1800 dollars for the kit, not as much ISO range as the K3, no selectable AA filter, I have too much in Pentax to switch brands, no OVF, and I could come up with more. Sure, it's impressive, but I'd say the K3 is still more impressive.

But to be fair, the kit is with the 16-50 F2.8. Body only is $1200, so it's a bit more comparable.

Also - SLT does lose a bit of light vs standard mirror, so the downside to the 12FPS is weaker comparable ISO performance.

[VisualDarkness]

I like sony cameras, but I can't use them. All their EVFs I used sadly have given me motion sickness. The same goes for Olympus and Canon but strangely I can use the Samsung ones, it probably has something to do with the panels used.

[JinDesu]

That's probably either the screen tear or a different refresh rate. I know what you mean. When I have incorrect refresh rates or screen tear while gaming, it can make me nauseous.

[WillWeaverRVA]

Brand loyalty aside, the K-3 seems to beat the a77 II in most ways with better battery life, an OVF, selectable AA filter, and lens selection. The Sony has better burst framerate, but even if it has improved tracking AF I think I'd rather be shooting moving subjects through an OVF versus an EVF.

[6BQ5]

I think the big differentiators are the viewfinders and the lenses. Personally, I love OVFs over EVFs - at least for now. While I would be curious to try the a77 Mk II I would not consider buying it for that reason alone. I understand that the a77 Mk II can work with Konica/Minolta lenses but I prefer the K-mount system.

[VoiceOfReason]

But to be fair, the kit is with the 16-50 F2.8. Body only is $1200, so it's a bit more comparable.

Also - SLT does lose a bit of light vs standard mirror, so the downside to the 12FPS is weaker comparable ISO performance.

To tell the truth I've never even used the full burst rate on my K5. High FPS really hasn't been a feature I've used, btu that's because of the type of shooting I do, which is why that wouldn't be important to me.

I do wonder if that kit lens is WR because it seems that the body is on the Sony.

[JinDesu]

To tell the truth I've never even used the full burst rate on my K5. High FPS really hasn't been a feature I've used, btu that's because of the type of shooting I do, which is why that wouldn't be important to me.

I do wonder if that kit lens is WR because it seems that the body is on the Sony.

It should be the same 16-50 as introduced on kit with the previous A-77, and several sites state that it's weatherproof (retails at $799 or so).

[VisualDarkness]

To tell the truth I've never even used the full burst rate on my K5. High FPS really hasn't been a feature I've used, btu that's because of the type of shooting I do, which is why that wouldn't be important to me.

I do wonder if that kit lens is WR because it seems that the body is on the Sony.

I use burst for concerts, events and sports but just short ones, I very rarely hit the limit. Faster burst sounds useful, longer isn't that interesting.

[monochrome]

At my age I use autofocus much of the time with digital cameras. I might consider such a camera with an adapter if it was easier to use my existing manual focus K-mount lenses to produce the same or better images than a K3 or K-01.

Otherwise, there isn't enough advantage over my K3 to warrant the investment. I'd buy another K-mount lens instead.

And - Sony.

[Fogel70]

This old slogan is probably the biggest reason for avoiding this camera.

[RobA_Oz]

Some people like EVFs. I haven't found one that I'd prefer to use over an OVF, although the latest Olympus EVF seems pretty good. I used to think I'd like a tilting LCD monitor until the K-3 came along and now I think they're less attractive, because the FLUcard/smart phone or tablet combination reduces their value.

Above all, Sony strikes me as a talented company with a bad case of ADHD, and the A-mount has all the appearance of slowly dying on its feet, in spite of those lovely Zeiss lenses. I really doubt that the refreshed A77 is going to resuscitate it. They've put too much energy into their other product ranges, and there's almost too many of them to take their imaging product strategy seriously.

I've no doubt they'll sell a reasonable number of these, but I do wonder if they'll make a useful profit from it, although you could say that about most of their cameras.

[VisualDarkness]

There's a reason Sony stock is considered crap and external experts cry about years of bad business.

[elpolodiablo]

Looks to be a good camera, but would it entice existing Pentax shooter to switch? I don't think so, at least not for me. Because at the end of the day it's what it is, a APS-C size sensor SLR-like camera, it offers more or less the same feature on the K-3, some features works better but others worst, If you have an existing line up of Sony/Minolta A-mount lens then yes, this would look like an attractive update, but as it was pointed out earlier, now that Sony seems to pay more attention to the (F)E mount than the A mount, would you consider buying into a mount that may or may not survive in the long term as someone who doesn't have any investment in this system?

If I am to buy any camera in the current Sony line up, it will be a A7 with a kit lens, then I will stick my collection of Pentax legacy prime lenses on it and have fun. I might do just that towards the end of the year if we don't hear anything from Pentax.

[jogiba]

Oh look, Sony's camera du jour. Wonder what mount is going to be obsoleted this week?


M

What mount did they dump ?

[RobA_Oz]

Dying a lingering death is perhaps less honourable than a swift hara kiri stroke...