That David Kilpatrick's tangent-obsessed effort makes it to 'real world performance' almost half way through the slew of wordy detail tells clued up readers all they need to know. He seems obsessed with market positioning and the 'competition', and things like shutter lag. You know, the really important stuff that delivers fine images - not.
AF gets a huge run, to be expected I suppose. It's always easy to criticise AF on any camera, it seems. The review is strong on listing detail rather than why and how they work in the real world.
Anyone thinking the a77 finder is not significantly improved in the a99 has vision problems. DK implies they are almost identical. Thrice tells us they are not. We use both, are thousands of frames in, and they are very different to work with.
What he seems to miss in these rather glib overall comments is that the EVF is a command centre, yet gives the incorrect impression the view in daylight is 'dim' when a simple tap on the magnifying button gives you everything you need, in 1-2 seconds. He omits even one mention of focus peaking, and its uses.
Later it is indeed revealed that he is another OVF holdout, longing for the simple life - the a900 experience. Yeah, I remember those days, of lost images from no focus verification and no image review, poor mid to high ISO without huge post effort, peering through a dark glass window desperately hoping to get focus right, using an exposed dim LCD - useless for reviews, no real time histo, endless image re-shoots, no two way horizon level, high audible noise levels, high vibration levels, and so on. It's over, thankfully. Battery life, give me a break - pony up the bucks for a second or third one. That is what a pro would do.
For manual focus lens users, the big difference is one FF camera provides fine controls enabling any user to nail focus and exposure every time no matter the light, and the 'competitors' do not, and cannot.
Sad really, but as the 'review' is free, it is worth the cost of reading.