Future user

They're trying to replicate a f2.8 range with primes. The next logical step should be 10 or 12mm f2.8 and 90 or 100mm f2.8. I don't think 16mm because it's too close to 19mm. The 60mm MTF is...

D7100 is better for action and wildlife thanks to the higher pixel density and better AF system. Therefore, since a 1 year old is within both action and wildlife genres, get D7100....IMHO.

If IQ is great, will make a nice 18-24-35 f1.8 primes in one. Now they make a 55-135 f1.8 (55-90-135 primes in one) and FF might wet their pants.

DP1m is better for landscapes and D7100 is  better for wildlife/sports.

I think the DP2m would be the only non-M4/3 cam I'd choose. It's like a mini medium-format 45mm equivalent fixed lens cam. Yes, too many limitations to be a carry everywhere, but... when it's good,...

It's much better to spend some years in getting the best of what you have, instead of treating as disposable technology and getting obsessed over the next best thing, but hey, it's ok as long as...

I can see a 35-70 f1.8 and 70-135 f1.8...

The doors and windows are great, but...argh, I hate that cartoonish HDR style...

You aren't wrong, but that's just the limitations we've had with wide lenses until now. With f1.8 in the ultrawide range there would be still a large depth of field, and tripod could be avoided in...

You aren't wrong, but that's just the limitations we've had with wide lenses until now. With f1.8 in the ultrawide range there would be still a large depth of field for landscape, and tripod could...

It would be very useful for handheld night landscapes, wouldn't it?

It would be very useful for handheld night landscapes, and indoors, wouldn't it?

Great. Now make a 8-16 f1.8 and 50-100 f1.8. I bet some FF users would sheet on their pants, LoL!

Olympus should release a 9-18 II with full sharpness across the frame. The 7-14, on the other hand, is impressively sharp corner to corner, the Nikon 14-24 equivalent. It's expensive compared to...

...unfortunately, some nice guy might chime in to tell us how useless is M4/3 for action, how much better are the DSLR for action, and how lucky you were to get these shots.

No, but for OM lenses.

Wasn't Olympus working on a 0.5x reducer? YES! Seems so:

http://www.43rumors.com/olympus-working-on-a-sort-of-speed-booster-adapter-too/

Hope that see the daylight some day...

Meanwhile, this...

I can't understand why some people complain about M4/3 not having good tele lenses. That's simply not true, and your full-size pictures are a great example.

If your file is very sharp and clean to begin with, huge sizes. I've printed A4 from very clean and sharp 1280x1024 files.

25/1.4 is slower than 50/1.8? 70-300 4.5-5.6 is faster than 35-100 f2.8? Well, in my world f1.4 is faster than f1.8, and f2.8 is faster than f4.5-5.6. Oh...you're talking about the world famous DoF...