Peiasdf: RX100 / RX100 II is just too much camera in such small size that it renders small mirrorless / EVIL camera like GM1 and Pantax Q pointless. Unless the intent is to use 20 f/1.7 or 17 f/1.8 with the GM1, everyone is better served by a RX.
@Logawhich camera fits in which pocket is the most boring, pointless (and stupid) argument ever discussed on dpreview.
People (like you) expecting everyone dress the same dresses and puts cameras in the same "places" need just to look at reality.
write2alan: What good can the newest Mac OSX do if it can not be installed on a DuoCore Power PC with 16 GB of RAM. Apple is full of it....I won't spend a single dime on Apple products. I got robbed by Apple about $3000.00 a few years ago.
@groucherApple sold macs PPC for 9 years and actually they were faster than Intel based machines for the first 7 years.
@write2alan A 2008 G5 can exist only in your mind. Apple sold G5 macs up to 2006.
Wow, 1/16000 silent shuter!!!
Isn't awkward that Sony and Panasonic, two companies w/o a "photographic history", try (and succeed) to innovate more than Canon, Nikon and Pentax?
Tim in upstate NY: Did someone post down below (or was it somewhere else) that the 75/1.8 is made by Sigma? Is it true? (seems unlikely to me.
....BTW For those here who may wonder where I've been since last year, my absence has been caused by an illness that involved major surgery (to the brain x2 and countless bouts of radiation and chemotherapy. If I ever get out of this wheelchair, I still hope to get some more usage from my OMD, 75/1.8 and several other m4/3 lenses . With partial paralysis in my left arm and hand, I may have to teach my wife how switch lenses or just use the one that's already mounted when I leave the house. I don't want go back to a P&S but who knows?
Have I missed much?
No, the 75/1.8 might have been designed by Sigma but is made by OLY.
1380 comments!!!Olympus products still grab people attention and that's what drives someone mad...
G Davidson: Just looking at the extreme amount of comments is telling. It seems there is a strong interest in m4/3, even if the time when just the right model to really take off is still to come.
One thing holding them back is the lack of pro use to aspire to. To my mind, with all the latest models offer, all they need are some very bright (f0.95-1.2), autofocusing affordable primes and there will be no need for using a larger format.
Nobody use a 24-xx zoom for DOF control.
P.S.I still have to see a 24-XX zoom for FF, regardless of its aperture, that is as good as my Zuiko 12-60.
had you spent more of your time taking picture instead of annoying people with things they already know (it doesn't take a lot of time multiplying a number by 2) you'd know that what impact most a lens price is its quality, both optical and build.
Saying that a lens shouldn't cost 1000$ (that will probably become 800$ quite soon) because of its FF equivalent aperture is just stupid.
Obsessed FF fanboys (like you and yabokkie) who thinks everyone should have a FF camera, are the ones needing help, not me.
For God sake... There's a part of human kind who doesn't give a f**k about FF!!!Ok? Got it?How can we get to make you understand this simple fact???
I don't want a FF: my m43 stuff is less expensive, lighter and give me all the quality I need.
M43 is a system, full stop.
yabokkie, seriously, what's wrong with your brain?
vesa1tahti: Oly is from the past. Buy APS-C or FF- Nikons, and you are happy. Cheers.
Contrarian views?!?! Oh my God... " Buy APS-C or FF- Nikons, and you are happy" is just a slogan, as bad as useless._ _ _
"Oly is on the death row"Just because you wish it doesn't mean it will happen...
I really hate when people tell me what to do, think or buy. Don't you have something better to do? Is so sad your life? Come on...
King Penguin: Ok it sure is a cute and attractive camera with great form and controls............but why would you purchase this when for the same(ish) money you can have a camera with a sensor FOUR, yes that's right, FOUR times the area, ie, a Nikon D600.
Actually Ferrari cars are made by Fiat.
Kodachrome200: to bad they didnt manufacture and sell it under there own brand. could have saved us all 500 bux
Based on what you think the Olympus-made (NOT SIGMA) 75mm could be even cheaper than a lens with a full plastic barrel? Pure and ridiculous fanboyism?
MightyMike: Sigma also designed the Pana-Leica 25mm F1.4 for full size four-thirds and the Pana-Leica 25mm F1.4 for micro 43rds, they designed the Olympus 90-250mm F2.8 and the 75-300mm F4.8-6.3. The designed one of the 40-150 slower lenses too. I'm sure there are others. the thing is all companies have the ability to design great lenses and all companies sometimes cut too many corners and design junk so no need to be a Sigma basher as they're actually pretty good. Why does Sigma get to make lenses for Olympus, Panasonic and Leica? I supposed these companies fished around for a design so they don't tie up their resources that are actually being put to other things. its either a resources issue or Sigma designs these lenses for the sole purpose of selling the design to another company. Another case is the Tokina 16.5-135mm that patent is owned by Pentax. and if you look hard enough you'll find such collaboration or sharing across many companies.
This is just a theory, not a proof.
Olympus-Sigma "cooperation" is old and well-know but there's no evidence something similar happened between Pana and Sigma.
Don't get me wrong, Sigma has proven to be a very good lens maker and Pana might benefit form such a partership, but the story you told it's far form being 100% plausible.
I don't have to find anything since I'm already aware of sigma patent for a 25/1.4 lens. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT A PANASONIC PATENT FOR THE SAME KIND OF LENS EXISTED BEFORE SIGMA'S ONE.