Wow, lots of discussion missed the last few hours. Here's what I think, and it's NOT to support Sony's decision in any way, just my personal beliefs:
"Live view on a professional body is not neccessary."
Do I think it's strange Sony didn't implement mirror flip-up live view in the A900? Yes, I do. However, strange, in this case, does not mean wrong. Sony's being different, not wrong. For me, there could be nothing better than a large, bright viewfinder that covers 100%, and only for very specific situations, like low- and high-angle photography, would live view be something I'd like to have. Then, however, the camera would need a flip-out screen as well, which, in my eyes, should be on a pro body. Again, just my opinion, don't shoot me for it.
I think everybody needs to consider how much they'd use live view before saying the A900 lacks it. I've handled the A350 a few times, both times using LV to try it out, and I must say, I didn't really like it. Sure, in some situations it's very useful, in unusual angles and linked to a computer (I think one of the 40D's greatest features), but I wouldn't use it in daily life. A viewfinder is just a way better option for that.
To conclude, may I make clear that this is a pro camera. I'm sure lots of the Sony/other users here on the forum would like to have one, and possibly buy one as well. However, most won't. You need to look at this issue from a professional point-of-view. Would a pro use live view? Specific kinds of pro's, possibly. But professional photographers will go for maximum quality as much as they can, and the viewfinder offers that quality, not the LV.
Hope my post didn't seem too attacking or unfriendly. Just sharing my opinion, which is what we're supposed to do. I don't mind others having different opinions and blaming Sony for not integrating LV in the A900.
- Bjorn -