StevenE: It's micro 4/3, so you can forget about shallow DOF.If that doesn't bother you, then this format could work.Non starter for me, unless it can fit in my pocket.
don't know if people, who despise everything except FullFrame here did ever shoot with. or whatever their reasons are.
i like the m4/3 system. back then i even had DOF shallow enough for me with my 18.5 /1.8 nikon 1. most of the time i even struggled with a too shallow DOF (and 18.5 /1.8 with a crop of 2.7x is nothing some people here want to touch ever!)so it all comes down what you want.
shallow DOF and a creamy bokeh (these excact words!) is b̶̶e̶̶t̶̶t̶̶e̶̶r̶ more apparent with FF than m4/3. m4/3 can not reach that level, so i think, people who are biased will use that fact.while others use size/portability.
after all this years of debate i am reading this argument-slapping more with a smile than emotions.
why choose full 4/3 lenses? they are not much smaller than lenses for APS or FF systems.m4/3 is, in my opinion, much lighter and THIS is what i see in m4/3, a system with good (not utterly gorgeous) but light glass.
i found 4/3 DSLRs more funny than anything. bulky and not light, so the smaller senser would not make much sense to me...
marike6: Close to the same size and weight as the GH3 (and the D5200, surprisingly). Not a problem for me, but many think DSLR sized bodies run counter to the m43 philosophy.
This camera also doesn't have the good looks of the EM-5, IMHO, but then neither does the GH3.
I think it's the way the grip looks tacked on that detracts for the design. The three knurled knobs also look a bit odd. The two command dials should probably have been embedded in the grip and thumb rest rather than placed on top.
And since most Olympus lenses are silver, it's odd that the E-M1 is only offered in Black.
+1 for this. while lenses are considerably lighter, big FF lenses have it's own right to exist.
fast lenses like the panasonic 25/1.4: 200 gnikon 24/1.4 G: 620 gcanon 24/1.4 USMII: 650 g
well, just plain numbers. don't even know what that means...
emircruz: Come on oly.. Put this sensor plus the is and wifi tethering on an $600 e-xxx and 43 is truly alive again! Add weather sealing for $999
sure about that? personally, i think, mFT is a very nice compromise between small and "large size" sensors (whatever that means).
it has a chance in this "price level" because1. mFT is significantly smaller than APS or FF2. mFT is cheaper than APS or FF
hate to state it, but because there are point and shoot cameras like the Olympus E-PL3 Kit for 250 euros out there, more people can afford the mFT system, compared to EF or F. we will see how the situation will be in 10 years. i think: amazing!
i don't want to be heretic or something, but shouldn't you compare ISO 3200 +/-2 with ISO 800 +/-0 INSTEAD of ISO 3200 +/-0 ? ISO 800 +/-0would be the same exposure time as ISO 3200 +/-2 and thus be more practical...?
i tried to overexpose my photos with +1.7 in raw mode and found, that most of the time in aperture mode with auto ISO i could instead do +/-0 and don't expose that long with stepped up high ISO settings...
holy ****. that is awesome!