Am I crazy? Considering OM-D over K-5II...

Sorry, you are interpreting what I am saying in a way I did not intend. I am saying 2/3 stop is noticeable, so is 1 1/3 stop, but APS-C is in the middle in a nice spot. I.e. I wouldn't notice a huge difference going either way, but going from 4/3" to full frame is pretty big (2 stops), as is going from APS-C to 1" or 2/3" (also 2 stops). I notice the difference shooting with my D700 (sold this) vs D7000 but the APS-C is adequate most of the time for what I shoot (weddings, etc) so am fine with the D7000. If I shot weddings all the time I would get the full frame, but shooting a couple a year isn't worth owning the full frame for. With 4/3" if APS-C is already stretching what I would do, I would hesitate to go even smaller. What would work is if I bought some f/1.8 primes, then this would make up the difference and some with the f/2.8 zooms I am currently using on APS-C. The issue is now bounce flash and the body is too small for said flash Again, I am stretching the APS-C more than I should, most would use full frame for shooting weddings, so 4/3" is even more of a stretch.

I never said 4/3" wasn't good enough. It is good enough, but APS-C is more flexible by 2/3 stops. Again, 1/3 stop is typically considered noticeable. Do you need better or not? Everyone has a point where they will settle. The issue with Q is that it requires ultra expensive lenses (that are also quite large) to make the most of its sensor. Its resolution demands are huge. So with smaller sensors you actually need more expensive lenses to make the most of the sensor.  However, most people buying the Q don't care so much about pixel level sharpness.  Image level it is fine.

Exactly, the OM-D is a very nice package. I honestly wouldn't buy an SLR for general use, as I much prefer having my shots in focus. I can't believe how much trouble I was fussing with to get in focus shots (doesn't matter if it is Nikon, Pentax, or whatever). However, I do miss a lot of shots with mirrorless as the camera was too slow to focus or just won't focus

I was split between 3 cameras, Olympus OM-D, Samsung NX20, and Fuji XP1. I ended up with the NX20 because I got good deals on some lenses, and I really like the lenses they have. The OM-D had me on the fence because of I did not like my EP1 I owned very much. At the time I started buying Samsung lenses the OM-D wasn't out yet so if I had seen reviews for it first, I might have put it back in the running. The Fuji probably has the best high ISO of the 3, but probably the worst for AF. The Samsung seems pretty good balance, it has a few quirks, but decent overall. Worst thing about the Samsung is it doesn't hold its value at all. Neither did the Fuji though, which is why I have one of those too

I have too many cameras though, and am thinning them out.  The Fuji will probably go because it is too quirky for my tastes.  Pentax Q, Samsung NX20, and D7000 are probably where I will settle.  If the K-5II had been out instead of original K-5, I would have that instead of the D7000.

Eric

--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)
See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)