Sony A99 II and 70-400?

I'm intrigued by the possibilities from this combination but can't find much information about it.  (I know the A99 II is still pretty new)
I'd be interested in what others know/think/have heard about it.  I did see the review on Sony Alpha rumors where it was compared with the Nikon workhouse and this heightened my interest.

Background. I shoot Canon and at one time carried a bunch of primes but in recent years for landscapes, large animals and occasional birds I've been using a Canon 24-70 F2.8 II on an A7R II and 100-400 II on 5Dsr for the majority of my work with a 16-35 F4 and 500 f4 for the long and short extremes when I need them.

I love both lenses and don't mind using bodies from different systems.  I'm particularly hesitant to give up the 100-400 but so am wondering how the Sony stacks up. For me, the main drawback of the 5Dsr is the buffer but a faster frame rate would be nice too. Since my only goal is the print, big mp sensors are desirable.

If I'm still intrigued in a month I'l probably rent the combination and see for myself.  Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

You can't go wrong with that combo...I am loving the camera. Go over to Fred Miranda, lots of examples and talk. Here is a video comparing the d5 to the 99II
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1471039
I also have the 300 f2.8, 500 f4, and Minolta 600 f4.

I consider the a99 Mk II the best "DSLR" currently on the market. I have not tested or used that lens so I can't really comment on it.

Thanks Mike in O. It was that video that reignited my interest in this camera and it sounds like you like the lens also.

EJ if you don't mind sharing, what do you feel are some of its strong points, the things that make it the "best DSLR" on the market?

Sure  It uses the best 35mm sensor currently on the market - the Sony 42MP sensor and it can shoot 42mp RAWs at 11FPS - that's an insane amount of data throughput.  Couple that with a hybrid AF system that uses both fast off sensor phase detect with super accurate on sensor phase detect and you have the most accurate focusing DSLR style camera on the market.  It also has zero mirror slap which tends to undermine sharpness.  Couple that with the price and its many other features including superior video capability and it's pretty hard to beat.  Some will argue the Pentax K1 but it doesn't have the frame rate and a really crappy AF system.  The only question on the a99 II side is if the system has the lenses that you need as the options are more limiting then in the Canikon world, especially at the long end.

Slight correction...claimed fps is 12 and tested as such though imaging resource could only measure 11+ fps.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58925116

I corrected it - was just going from memory

Thanks to both of you. I recall reading somewhere that the 70-400 is in the same league as the Canon 100-400. Any thoughts on that Mike?

It is a really good lens with the new Nikon 80/400, the Canon 100/400 and it on the same playing field..of course it is 70mm at the wide end and f4.  FYI, the 70/400 version 1 is the same as ver 2 except white paint, new nano coating, and a new ssm motor which is a bit faster (4x faster than ver 1 but I sure can't tell much difference except in acquisition)
edit: this camera is in perpetual short supply, Sony underestimated demand obviously

I would not consider the Nikon 80-400G lens on the same playing field as the canon 100-400 Mk II.  The Canon is substantially better.- I base that on a fairly big number of each that I have calibrated.  The Nikon is a good lens but the Canon is an exceptional lens.

E.J. Peiker wrote:I would not consider the Nikon 80-400G lens on the same playing field as the canon 100-400 Mk II.  The Canon is substantially better.- I base that on a fairly big number of each that I have calibrated.  The Nikon is a good lens but the Canon is an exceptional lens.

Get yourself a 70/400 and let's do a comparison with the 100/400 II
edit: the 70/400 and 500 f4 are the only true (as far as I know) Sony designed lenses (long or super telephoto),  the rest are KM designs which are good but probably not world beating.  Though my 300f2.8 is pretty spectacular.

Tamron is coming out with an A mount 150-600.  If it is comparable in quality to the Sigma it could be a great combo.

I would really love to ditch Canon for the Sony 99II but as has been mentioned the lenses are just not available yet. True, there is the one lens I really need, 500 f4, but I would have to ditch my Canon 500 and 200-400 to afford one!! So for the moment I will have to pass.

If Sony could come up with an E-mount camera that can focus reliably with my Canon long glass and has 11fps on a full frame then I am going to be very tempted. It would need a decent touch screen though, because choosing a focus point on the A7RII is not intuitive enough

I also have a feeling they will do this.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-slt-a99-ii/9

Dpreview have completed their review. Based solely on the AF performance I would be very cautious about using this body for action. BUT I would also be cautious about using Dpreview as gospel. The first AF test (guy on bike riding straight towards the camera) Looks to have around 13 of the 16 shots OOF, but it also looks like a certain amount of motion blur is detectable (to my eyes (could be JPG noise reduction ?)).

Next test, five of the nine shots are not focused. Next test, 50% not focused. Next test, one of sixteen seems focused but I would not call it sharp. These tests are shooting a big subject, not an eagles eye ball! Technically using PDAF with a mirror in constant use the AF should be better than with a DSLR where focus is broken while the mirror travels.

I have of course reservations about DPreview testers (not the first time a focus system was tested with too slow a SS. But I would be put off a bit by this.

Interested in Mike O's comments and experiences on the AF.

I own both the Sony 70-400g2 and newest Nikon 80-400mm. I would have to say the Sony beats
it out for IQ.. I don't know about the Canon 100-400mm, but have heard it can't be beat..

Neilyb wrote:https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-slt-a99-ii/9

Dpreview have completed their review. Based solely on the AF performance I would be very cautious about using this body for action. BUT I would also be cautious about using Dpreview as gospel. The first AF test (guy on bike riding straight towards the camera) Looks to have around 13 of the 16 shots OOF, but it also looks like a certain amount of motion blur is detectable (to my eyes (could be JPG noise reduction ?)).

Next test, five of the nine shots are not focused. Next test, 50% not focused. Next test, one of sixteen seems focused but I would not call it sharp. These tests are shooting a big subject, not an eagles eye ball! Technically using PDAF with a mirror in constant use the AF should be better than with a DSLR where focus is broken while the mirror travels.

I have of course reservations about DPreview testers (not the first time a focus system was tested with too slow a SS. But I would be put off a bit by this.

Interested in Mike O's comments and experiences on the AF.

I really haven't done much shooting yet (snowed in), but I did do some ducks in flight at 8fps (teal and mallards) with my version 1 300 f2.8 and they were all tack sharp.  Shooting backyard birds, no problems with the 70/400 and 500.  That included bushtits (a very small fast bird that never sits still).  It seems that DPreview's idea of testing AF-C for the most part was using the single center point, that doesn't test the camera's AF, only the ability of the photographer to keep the center point on target.  They alluded to jumpiness of the 77II to stick on target (reviewer admitted that he reversed the sticky scale) and the 99II reviewer said it was the same?  Another quibble was the complaints of not being able to see the focus points which are light gray (we had to point out to him that with a button push, active focal points flash yellow).  I could keep going but so far, I couldn't be happier.

Mike in O wrote:

Neilyb wrote:https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-slt-a99-ii/9

Dpreview have completed their review. Based solely on the AF performance I would be very cautious about using this body for action. BUT I would also be cautious about using Dpreview as gospel. The first AF test (guy on bike riding straight towards the camera) Looks to have around 13 of the 16 shots OOF, but it also looks like a certain amount of motion blur is detectable (to my eyes (could be JPG noise reduction ?)).

Next test, five of the nine shots are not focused. Next test, 50% not focused. Next test, one of sixteen seems focused but I would not call it sharp. These tests are shooting a big subject, not an eagles eye ball! Technically using PDAF with a mirror in constant use the AF should be better than with a DSLR where focus is broken while the mirror travels.

I have of course reservations about DPreview testers (not the first time a focus system was tested with too slow a SS. But I would be put off a bit by this.

Interested in Mike O's comments and experiences on the AF.

I really haven't done much shooting yet (snowed in), but I did do some ducks in flight at 8fps (teal and mallards) with my version 1 300 f2.8 and they were all tack sharp.  Shooting backyard birds, no problems with the 70/400 and 500.  That included bushtits (a very small fast bird that never sits still).  It seems that DPreview's idea of testing AF-C for the most part was using the single center point, that doesn't test the camera's AF, only the ability of the photographer to keep the center point on target.  They alluded to jumpiness of the 77II to stick on target (reviewer admitted that he reversed the sticky scale) and the 99II reviewer said it was the same?  Another quibble was the complaints of not being able to see the focus points which are light gray (we had to point out to him that with a button push, active focal points flash yellow).  I could keep going but so far, I couldn't be happier.

Good to know. I have given up commenting on DPReview about the absolute shoddy nature of their tests / testers.