Aaron MC: I am tentatively optimistic about this camera. I think that this is undoubtedly the G3 sensor, but it appears that Olympus has squeezed a lot of performance from the pipeline. It's still an old sensor, though, and I fear that it enters the market obsolete and will be made only more so with the release of the GH3.
Whether it's an old sensor or not, future sensors will be better. Isn't the bottom line whether or not this camera meets your needs? It's pretty easy to get inadvertently caught up in lusting after the latest and greatest. That can be expensive.
Peter Nelson: With the advent and advances in m4/3 I have to say that I am not interested in another FF Pro DSLR fror anyone. I have two (2) FF DSLR's, a Canon 1DsMkII and an older Kodak SLR/n FF. I have an even older Nikon D1H Pro Camera as well. I like the IQ from all three. But, I am tired of the weight and size. When are Nikon and Canon going to realize that the day's of these large cameras are over due to advances in electronics and sensor's.
spidercrown: The smaller format will always lose in IQ but probably at some point most people will say, "I guess I don't really need to shoot at iso 4,000,000, I'll settle for the iso 1,000,000 on the 4/3s camera." Re: shooting speed: Have you noticed the 9fps Olympus EM-5?
Almost no color shifting through iso 3200 or even 6400. At iso 12800 though, many areas suddenly show a lack of blue in the blue channel resulting in an ugly, strong, saturated color cast. But at iso 25600 there is, again, almost no color shifting! Lots of noise, true, but only a small drop in color saturation in some of the colors and the blacks are no longer as black as they should be.
mpgxsvcd: I want an m4/3s telescope. A nice 1250mm F4.0 would be great.
Well, SLR Magic is making a 12-36X50 spotting scope for mFT. That's equivalent to FF 840-2520mm. It mounts directly on the camera just as a lens would. It's not f/4 but it is water resistant/fog proof. Adorama has it for $250, not bad.
Bart Hickman: 300mm/F6.3 on micro 4/3 = 600mm/F12.6 on full frame or 400mm/F8.4 on APS-C. Doesn't sound so amazing to me.
Oh Bart, it only that were true! I could have done amazing things with my large format 90mm, F/8 lens! By your calculations that would have been equivalent to a FF 22.5mm f/2.0! Check your math buddy.