Instruction: Given a question and the related document, and generate the answer to the question based on the information provided in the document.

Input:
Question: A65 vs. A77? I was looking on the Sony site and cannot find a significant difference between the above two cameras...now as they are $1000 dollars apart in cost I figured the difference would stand out. Perhaps I have been blinded by these wonderful cameras, but can someone please point out what I assume will be obvious once I am told? :-) Thank you!
Document: I previously had the a65, which in its own right was a great camera but i wanted to upgrade from the kit 18-55 to the 16-50 f 2.8 lens. Note, for the owners of the a65 i recommend putting it up for sale because if you purchase the 16-50 you'll be at the price point of the A77 kit. Only makes sense then right? There is a significant difference with the autofocus engine that the A77 uses versus the A65.
SO, to get an equivalent setup with Nikon, the cost would be $2650 vs $1500 for the Sony w/ kit lens. Also, compare the two lenses on SLRGear and check out the "blur index." Compare them at 16mm/17mm and f/4 and then at 55mm/50mm and f/5.6 and you'll see Sony actually out performs the Nikon at the sweet spot for both short and long focal lengths!
Fyi, sony has repurposes many of these older lenses and rebranded themCons:The 16-50 is HEAVYI already had two extra extended batteries from the A65 but the A77 consumes more battery especially with the lcd in useI think that's about it. I've own Nikon cameras and use to be devoued  but i don't think i'll ever turn back. The features you get in a sony body is leaps and bounds over what Nikon (old d5200 & p510 owner).
For most it would be fine.So my expectations grew from the ~$600 range to about $900-1000. So I compared the K-5 to the Sony A65. For me it was pretty much a dead heat, with the K-5 slightly outperforming the A65, especially as it is a weather-sealed camera.
Lo and behold, the A77 is listed in their table on p 74. They also go a step further and explain that translucent mirror cameras have a particular advantage over the moving mirror type when in Live View mode since they can use phase detect focusing on moving animals vs. contrast based AF which is slower and cannot keep up with fast movement.Needless to say, I have convinced myself (again) that this is the best camera for me considering features, performance and price.
However much I considered this, I then rejected the idea due to the cost of the Sony 70-200G SSM that you would have to buy for video, as there are no other obvious good options for Sony / Minolta that would be silent and quick focusing.
Sony, Sigma, etc make flashes with our mount. It's true, pocketwizard does not. But I use cowboy studio triggers, and guess what? They work equally reliably as pocketwizards, and they cost a small faction of what pocketwizards do. Perhaps a cowboystudio trigger wouldn't work from 100 meters away, and perhaps a pocketwizard would. But I don't work that far from my lights. In normal studio conditions, my cowboystudio triggers work as reliably as my company's pocketwizards.
Again, the problem with the Mark II is that the camera is the price of the a77 for the body only. To buy the 24-70 2.8 lens which is canon's favorite among professional photographer's, it would cost you an extra $2k. I've also read numerous reviews on the Sony lens and everywhere has it matching up with all of the other big boy lenses. I think it would be obvious to say that the Canon lens is superior but is also three times as much!
To me though it is worth its weight in gold - I really love it that much, and I am a TOTAL newbie to a world of the SLT cameras - I cannot wait to find out everything that this camera is capable doing, of in my hands -- or what I am capable of capturing, with it in my hands!Read more about the EVF at Sony.com
The Sony A77 is a wonderful camera. The mirror technology and the 16-50 mm lens make for clear accurate shots. I bought theDavid Busch's Sony Alpha SLT-A77 Guide to Digital Photographyto help me utilize this camera, a huge step up from my beloved but aged Olympus. I also boughtDavid Busch's Sony Alpha SLT-A77/A65 Compact Field Guideto take with me in a camera case.
Answer: You should be able to compare the specifications and reviews and decide what fits your photography needs.  There are obvious differences in size and the number of dials/buttons for example.  Being an A700 user, ergonomics is one of the reasons I went for the A77.  There are others that I thought important such as the better AF module, but you may not care about it.The bottom line is, if you can't look at the specification list of the A77 and immediately identify some things that you need, then you don't need the expense of the A77.  You may also wish to look at the A57 and soon to be announced A37.