BennoFG: It seems the argument here is the big camera crowd saying:"this is why FF/35mm is better" and the m43 crowd saying "but this is why I bought m43 and didn't buy FF/35mm"
I'll join in. I am so stoked with m43. I do freelance travel photography. I moved from Nikon to m4/3 two years ago. So The big cameras were near on perfect until I had a comparison. I notice the EM-5 with a panny 20mm 1.7 gives a beautiful shallow portrait, but doesn't take away the natural smile on people facing a guy with a camera. The EM-1 gets pulled out in stiking jungle humidity with a 2.8 zoom that's also safely weatherproofed.
Those cameras are no longer insured. The price vs features required makes it affordable to risk having to replace a camera. I am saving money.
The size and weight benefits are appreciated no-end and the difference in image quality non-existant. really, the last 7 of 8 projects have been for digital end-use. I have not had to adjust to anything more than the button latout.
personally, m43 was godsend.Great interview! Keep pumping those high end bodies and lenses out Olympus, I'll keep buying them.
Dear plasnuThere is no perfect camera or sensor format in this world ...yet. That's why some of us have multiple systems. I use both FF Nikons as well as MFT Panasonic and OLympus. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. It is like comparing a corvette with a maita... What is best is what suits you at the time.I find myself using the iPhone the most..like they say, the best camera is what you have with you, and for what it is , The iPhone consistently makes impressive images.As for pushing the envelope, I think Sony is really doing that with the A7 and the RX1 in terms of size, but most other developments are refinements and evolutionary.Don't get too hung up with the format and enjoy making images.
Like other posters said, just plug the iPhone in with your USB cable. There are no transfer problems, Mac or PC. No software required either......
The image is tiny, how do we download a full size image ?
Love your proposal, and this is something Panasonic should have done with the G3 or the GH2 for sure. I just do not understand why they have continously resisted re-packaging their psudo DSLRs into a rangefinder style form factor.The new GX1 is such a big disappointment and i am sure they are loosing a group of users who desire a high end rangefinder style camera to SONY and the NEX7.I love my GH2 but do not always want a DSLR look when travelling. If the GX1 comes with a tilt screen and a view finder, just like the GH2, I would have jumped on it. Now it is just another Ho hum body with not much more to offer than the GF1 or the EP3. You seemed to have posted similar proposals to both Panasonic and Canon, you may want to make the post to Olympus as well.
Of course Sony already has the answer, in the form of the NEX7......
jschlarb: Did Ashton Kutcher pick those colors?
Maybe Ashton was the DESIGNER!
As a long time NIKON fan for more than 30 years, I must say I am deeply disappointed. Nikon reallyndropped the ball on this one. They have the perfect opportunity to lead the mirror less market with an APSC sensor camera to compliment their existing SLR line...and I emphasize compliment, not compete, as Sony did with their NEX line and the E mount. Going to all that trouble to create another sensor format does nothing for the consumer except create more confusion and additional hardware that will be difficult for 3rd party suppliers and lens manufacturers to support. Wouldn't it be great if the new Nikons are APSC, sharing the E mount? ....Just think of all the nice Zeiss glass that may be available. Don't get me wrong, I think both Nikon V models are beautifully designed, but they will be no match against the new Sony NEX5 and NEX7....Sony listened, and gave consumers what they want..I bet the waiting list will be long. Nikon, are you listening?
Joe Ogiba: Go look at the 22.5mm to 810mm equiv. lens on the Nikon P500 36x Superzoom that has the same size sensor then look at the Sony DT 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Zoom Lens for NEX Cameras 11x 27-300mm (35mm equivalent) zoom then you will see why this makes sense.
There is nothing wrong with a 1/2.3 sensor. I have one on my $300 Lumix point and shoot and it takes great pictures and videos in good light. It has a 14x "Leica designed" lens that retracts into a tidy pockatable size. It made a perfect package for a point and shoot to compliment my SLRs. To put interchangable lenses on a 1/2.3 sensor? For god's sake, WHY? What possible advantage would this have over a point and shoot, without all that extra stuff to carry?
zamorac: Well, I suppose it's good to have a breath of fresh air on market, but at 800$ pricetag this is ridiculous.
It is even more ridiculous that it sports a finger nail sized sensor!Pentax...what are you guys thinking?
John Cal: The look grows on you, Leica..ish. If it had Leica on the tag everyone would be marveling at the miniature brilliance and style of this new system. Let's wait and see the image quality before we burn Pentax at stake. This may be a winner lets wait and see.
Neither will Olympus and Sony, what kind of a dimm wit would try to sell a 2/3 sensor camera for $800. It is a niche market product for sure...no likely to generate a waiting list like the x100 or the Gh2