Now to my actual review.
1. In this lens I miss very especially the DMF-mode.
Explanation: The DMF-mode is a mode in which the autofocus performs the focus and you still can readjust the focus manually thereafter, without switching the focus mode. In this mode, the focus highlighting will appear in Live View, provided generally turned, always. The DMF is helpful in by pre-focused for a. But you want to focus a portion of the image, which is not covered by the centrally arranged sensor phalanx, or to make up false focus, you can do that quite easily, by refocusing manually.
The normal grip with a zoom lens is but that one first adjusts the focal length and then take care of the focus. This lens can so proceed only in manual focus mode. In the Focus automatic that's not. The DMG would thereby save a lot of work and time. Unfortunately, this is, as is the case with all SAM lenses not available.
2. The second negative criterion is the quality of workmanship.
The lens not only looks as if it is built overly plastic, its weight and the general feeling in the handling emphasize this subjective impression. The build quality has not convinced me at the price at all. But on the contrary. Who the lens Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM knows (a lens from Sony for the APS-C format), thanks SSM drive that supports even the esteemed by me DMF mode, yet just over 100 euros is cheaper, can pricing not understand at the rated this lens. Alone as a compatible lens for Vollvormat property can not justify the significant price difference with noticeably less power; at least not with me.
3. The autofocus drive
The integrated SAM engine, which brings a lack of DMF is significantly louder than a SSM (Sony), or $ (Tamron). But in my judgment, not too loud. Absolutely in the range of what is acceptable. I would not be embarrassed, so as to take pictures in a church. (Although a super quiet drive is still enjoyable for everyone involved :) But if, for example, uses old Minolta lenses that is virtually feel this drive as quietly.
4. Last but not least image quality.
I have researched a lot in advance, which lens is the best standard zoom for the A99. The assessment of professionals, such as DxO, I can confirm this absolutely. One for the price acceptable to good image quality. Sharp images, but in the corners of a noticeable loss of sharpness. Virtually no qualitative effects such as vignetting or aberration, but what is then very impressive. Ghosting and so I could not test adequately due to a short time. But nowadays the glass finishing for all producers should be such that ghosting is well suppressed. All in all, the image quality corresponding to the price. According to research, but you get the same offer at a much lower price from Tamron (SP 28-75 F2.8 Di). Make even claim that this is technically identical lenses from Minolta-time. But I can not confirm because I did not buy.
On the whole, a very solid for the lower price range of full frame zoom lens with relatively good Abbildunsqualität. But for my taste considering the competition yet far too little for the price. The one advantage that you have a lens from Sony, in which engages the lens correction and you have an AF-D mode, in my view, the price difference is not worth it.
On the subject lens correction I would rather buy the software DxO Optics Pro, when I get to a lot of cameras in combination with a large number of lenses, a lens correction, instead of investing these additional price only in a single lens. Who uses Lightroom can also search profiles lens itself or create one.
And on the subject AF-D: so truly valuable seems to me this functionality rather in telephoto zooms and not with standard zoom. I personally do not use them because I use more DMF. But for photographers who shoot fast-moving subjects (sports, vehicles, animals, etc.) I can not imagine the as AF-D really useful. Yet only in telephoto zooms.