Right on, Hakeem!
Hesel, let me make clear a couple of things. I do owe an A77 (I don't care wether you believe it or not). I also own the A55, the G1 of Panasonic and two Canon cameras. All that with a nice collection of glasses to match them.
I am very pleased with the A77 overall, although I am disappointed by some things Sony has done (or rather not done) to this camera. For instance the lack of a decent bracketing mode to shoot HDRs (it has a weird bracketing system, but it doesn't take advantage of the very fast shooting the A77 is capable of - I am talking about RAW MODE, which EXCLUSIVELY how I shoot). I'm also not satisfied with the EVF of Sony - it has an excellent resolution but it is far too contrasty and not useful in many situations. The noise (I imagine due to the SLT mirror) this camera produces is noticeable even at ISOs as low as 800; that is a little disappointing but to me not critical. But what I dislike the most of this camera is its bulk and weight -given the fact that it is a mirrorless system. That is fine for some situations, but I can't take it on a trip hanging off my shoulder all day long. That was one of the reasons I was attracted to the Olympus.
I shoot mostly landscapes, and nearly always at the lowest ISO available, so I am not talking of shots done at 3200 (though as I said, the OM-D performance is very decent at this ISO). Again, as I said, I ALWAYS - please read other people's posts more carefully before jumping to conclusions - shoot in RAW. I do have a couple of well calibrated and rather expensive monitors, FYI.
I find that shooting in RAW mode, the dynamic range of the OMD is better than my A77. Again I'm talking at the lowest ISO (50 in the A77 and nominally 200 on the OM-D. There is something some "mushiness" to the A77 images that I don't understand why they happen. By contrast, the OMD gives me wonderfully vibrant, clean and crisp images. A real delight. Naturally, these later appreciations are subjective, but I heard the same exact complaints from other A77 owners, so perhaps there is some objective truth to them.
Again, I've done my own informal testing with these two cameras and results are not as DXO suggests. As Hakeem has mentioned, there are other tests done (with DXO own software!!!), notably that of Tech Radar, which indicate that the OM-D ought to rank higher that it does in DXO's chart. DXO is indeed a reference in the testing of sensors (or has been up to the recent crunch), but we should not take their measurements as gospel. There are other outfits out there how are also credible.
I do not know whether DXO has some axe to grind or not with Olympus or the M43 system. All in all I've always "trusted" DXO evaluations, as they seemed to back my own experiences. But I don't completely trust these latest results. It now seems likely (in the light of the DP Review - DXO merger) that DXO was having some economic problems. Perhaps the review of the Olympus was not done to the older customary standards and was done just to silence the endless user's complaints.
I agree with those that say that DXO should explain to us how they performed these tests, if the methodology was the same used for other products and if the reviewers were the same old seasoned personnel or was done by novices. Maybe I am wrong, but I cannot avoid the feeling that things do not add up.