A few weeks ago, when the details of the 5D MkII were announced I was all for buying a 5D MkII, (once the price settled down). I already have a Canon so don't need to be told how good they are. However the Sony A900 leaves me very unsure.
When it comes to high ISO and noise the 5D MkII wins easily, no doubt about that, but the A900 has very good image stabilisation, and much better auto exp. bracketing, which is important for me.
I suspect, but do not know, that the Zeiss lens for the A900 will be better than the Canon lenses, but are very expensive. At the same time the standard Minolta fitting lenses are perhaps not as good as Canon.
Prices are difficult to assess, it depends where you buy the equipment, but the A900 body seems to be cheaper.
Has anyone been able to ignore their Canon bias and make an objective comparison of the two cameras? If anyone has any useful points to make, anything that I have missed, I'd be delighted to hear their views.