Why is the EM5 so much more popular than the GH3?

Some of us don't care about a built in flash and actually DIS-like the fully articulated screen. I had a GH2 and have an OMD and overwhelmingly prefer the flip up screen. Not dissing one or the other - just stating a preference - neither is "better", but one is better for me and the other for you. As for IBIS, we all got along fine without it. We got along fine without auto focus and auto exposure as well, or even built in metering. Doesn't mean we don't appreciate these things. I like IBIS and the IBIS on the OMD is so overwhelmingly good it opens up entirely new creative possibilities, like short time exposures handheld. Which aren't strictly necessary and I don't do often, but when I want the capability, I'm extremely glad to have it. Here are two of those, for example, that I'd never have been able to approach handheld with any previous camera:

Nobody's saying the GH3 is "less of a machine" - you're reading too much into that. We're responding to why the OMD appears to be more popular, which is a very different question, and the question raised by the OP. There are reasons that a lot of people who were drawn to m43 in the first place would be more drawn to the OMD and some of us are trying to explain those - or why WE were more drawn to it by way of explanation. That the GH3 is a better option for you is an equally good data point but clearly those reasons seem to have sway with fewer users, at least so far. I had a GH2 - it was and is a great camera, but it never worked well for me. The GH3 lost the one truly compelling feature that the GH2 had that appealed to me - the multi-aspect ratio. The OMD fits me like a glove. It seems to other folks too, based on its popularity. That doesn't make it BETTER, just MORE POPULAR, which was the point of the discussion.

Agreed!
-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/