With respect, the photo's were taken from the Official Sony website. The weight issue IS a valid one. The weight specified was the body only, when you consider the lens needed (DS Type), because of extra size of the sensor, we then have to put the flash unit on as well, It IS heavy. I do agree that from a professional view, Landscape and commercial applications probably will suffice. But in a portrait/Wedding situation, I'm not so sure. Sometimes the speed can be an issue as we all know in capturing that moment. Given all of the above aren't you just a little bit disappointed? On a final note giving marks out of 5 doesn't really give you a proper indicator, merely an excuse not to upset manufacturers too much when reviewing. 6 out of 5? thats just plain stupid!:(
I would agree with you with regards it's limited uses, but some of the points about weight and size are no different to Canon and Nikon. Lenses are roughly the same weight and the body is lighter.
I would rule out wedding for this camera, a lot of wedding photographers are switching to the D3/D700 and ditching flash. But for portrait/studio work this camera is idea.
Speed wise it is still (currently) class leading for a 20+ MP camera. 5fps is all you get out of the 1DSmark3 which is close to three times the price.
Built-in flash, well the only FF DSLR that has that is the D700. Even the old Canon 5D doesn't have built-in flash, and similarly needs a full blown flash unit to act as a wireless trigger just like the A900. Looking at the design of the A900, I think the decision was between having a 100% viewfinder and a Pop-up flash. Whether you like it or not (I think it sucks), the intended audiance would want the 100% viewfinder everytime.
And as for the six stars for Landscapes, I guess for ultimate IQ they are are saying it's better than the 1DSmark3, but costs 1/3 of the price. I would guess that the 1DSmark3 has got five stars for Landscapes as there was nothing close to it until the A900 came out. Obviously it's not going to show six stars, but what it's saying is that all previous five star ratings in the area will now be dropped to four.
I think the A900 body does have it's faults, but also huge progress has been made to produce a FF body. Just look at SSS (sorry, SS) on FF. How many times has this been discussed on the web saying that this was impossible? I think we need to give Sony a break and now let them expand on what they have. Improvements in AF are needed to match the top models from Canon and Nikon.
I would have liked a low noise 12MP FF camera from Sony this time around, but without the AF where would this camera sit in the market and who would be their customers?
I think Sony made the right choice, but those choices were not what I was personally looking for.