It’s targeted at the professional photographer, though if you look at its competitors you can see that both Canon and Nikon still have certain advantages over it.
And if you put them all side by side, I’m still not sure which one truly comes out on top.
The most important is this area down near the bottom front where you’ll see a dial.
There is a button and a switch here that makes it clickless if you’d like.
It’s more or less the same sensor that’s in the Sony a7r II, but the processor is a bit different.
Pixel for pixel, the a7r II can deliver better image quality at both high ISOs and in the versatility of the RAW files.
I wish they did though–Minolta was at one time one of the most important camera companies in the world.
So if you look at the Sony a99 II and trace its evolution, you honestly won’t see a whole lot of that heritage sans the mount.
Ergonomically speaking, Sony took advantage of the fact that they have an significantly larger amount of space to play with when designing and working with the Sony a99 II.
For starters, you’ll find a few dials and buttons on the front of the camera.
For what it’s worth, Sony has the best viewfinder but I’m able to see Canon’s autofocus points the easiest. I simply enjoy the layout of their buttons more and more.
Sony’s camera is more boxy in feeling but still makes for a nice ergonomic experience–if not for one that looks like it has the broadest shoulders. With the 5D Mk IV, I feel like Canon returned to a camera that feels like the Mk II–my absolute favorite digital camera of all time.
There are dials just where you need them; but I seriously think if you’re coming from the E mount system that this camera will be a big adjustment.