The ONLY interest I have in this camera is the AF Zeiss lenses. I see it as a contender for replacing my now sold Leica DMR/9 and lenses, and now sold Canon's with 85/1.2L and 135/2L.
I'm not necessarily seeing it as a system replacement, but more a supplement to the Nikon system in my wedding roller... and a nice portrait set.
If Nikon were to offer a 85/1.4VR and 135/2VR is the same manner as the more recent 100/2.8VR Macro ... this Sony consideration would be tabled in a heartbeat.
I have three concerns about buying into this proposition ...
Lack of fast Zeiss primes below 85mm ... which hopefully would NOT include their 50/1.4 which in every iteration (C/Y, ZF, and N) exhibits the worst Bokeh of any 50/1.4 I've ever used. The expensive Sony 35/1.4G is not on the list after seeing shots at f/1.4 that are unacceptably soft. So a Zeiss AF28/2 or AF35/1.4 would make it more attractive.
Any mention what-so-ever of crappy noise performance ... something that has plagued the Alpha series to date. Clean ISO 1600 is a must ... which is something a D3/D700 can do standing on it's head. I also personally could care less about this being 24 meg. and would have actually been more interested in FF 12 to 16 meg. with larger pixel sites.
Service ... perhaps the most important of the 3 by far. IMO from other experiences and looking at their history, Sony's corporate culture is a model of arrogance that Canon can only stand back and admire. I can say that I KNOW for a fact that Nikon's service system is excellent ... even though I've not yet joined the Professional version. I will NOT subject myself to anything even remotely akin to the nightmare of Leica service ever again. IMO, Sony will need to provide a Pro level service experience for this camera.
Other remote concerns: the modo stupid proprietary flash system that requires an adapter to use a PW or any radio system ... and lack of rental gear.