However, when people say that some MFT cameras are pocketable, what they really mean is that they're "more pocketable" in relation to other cameras, such as dSLRs - and they're absolutely right. Of course, not all MFT cameras have the same level of pocketability, with Panasonic's dSLR-shaped cameras being the least pocketable of all of them.
The point is that, as I have already stated, compacts outsell DSLRs/EVIL cameras by about 8 to 1. Your extended notion of pocketability just isn't cutting it out there in the market.
The reasons people choose compacts are varied, pocketability isn't the only factor. But in any case, blaming CSC's lack of penetration on pocketability alone is pretty presumptuous, especially considering the lack of visibility most consumers have with them in the first place. They are just now creeping into stores like Best Buy, but are no where on the radar for stores like Target and Wal-Mart. So, it's waaay too soon to blame anything on the form factor alone. I know people who have
specifically bought into MFT because of the pocketability factor. These are people who have a Smartphone for convenience, wanted better image quality than any compact could provide but didn't want something as large as an SLR because they couldn't stow it in a pocket. The market is out there, CSC's just have to get the word out.
I'll trot out the old video I put together when the forum was having this discussion when the GF1 was introduced:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frV3LT-EdM0
Just for the record, that video shows my original GF1 +20mm combo fit in three jacket pockets (two on a very tight fitting tech jacket), two front shirt pockets, a small pocket on a backpack, a small pocket on a sweater, a water bottle pocket on a baby bag and a pocket on a pair of cargo shorts.
1. A 20mm lens is really restricting things. Yes I know that "real photographers" love primes, but the mass market wants zooms. That is why the GF2+20mm is not a competitor to the G12, S95, LX5, XZ-1 etc. for most buyers.
And yet, as has been noted all over the place, cellphone cameras are
immensely popular and many camera manufacturers are on record blaming them for the decline in compact sales - and most of these cameraphones feature very unsophisticated, fixed focal length lenses.
I certainly agree that a lot of people want zooms, but for those who want pocketability I don't think primes are as big a leap as some people make it out. I think manufacturers need to hone their messaging on this, and they need to make it easy to have
both by introducing kits that include a compact primes ("Take it with you anywhere! Slip it in your pocket! Keep it in your purse!) and a mid-range zoom ("For those times where you want the flexibility of a zoom!").
2. Jacket pockets don't count if you aren't wearing a jacket. If you live in a warm climate, that is at least half the year. A lot of shirts either don't have pockets at all (T-shirts in a warm climate) or have very small pockets. You may be willing to have your entire wardrobe determined by the need to carry a camera around, but hardly anyone else is. The reality is that, unless your wardrobe is determined by the need to carry a camera around, then much of the time a GF2 just won't fit in your pocket.
I think you're ignoring the fact that a lot of people have a variety of pockets at their disposal - especially women who nearly always have some sort of bag with them. I didn't put together my wardrobe around my camera gear, it just so happens that I nearly always have some place to stash a camera. If this wasn't true, then I'd have a camera bag - and I
do not .
Now, if your definition of "pocketable" only applies to cameras that can fit in the back pocket of your jeans, that's a very narrow definition and really limits your choices.
My definition is that it fits into the front pocket of a regular pair of pants. That has me covered all year round. It limits my choices to almost any compact camera on the market.
And that is
your definition. So if you'd like to preface your comments stating that it's not pocketable
enough for you, then I have no argument with you. With that said, I've found that the GF1 + 20mm actually
does fit in the front pocket of a number of my pairs of slacks (the ones I'd wear to a business meeting or a night out) - and is this actually my preferred mode of carrying the camera at dinner parties, etc. where I don't want to have to wear a holster and look like an utter dork.
However, this whole thread is about how the G3 will supposedly kill off the market for premium compacts. It won't because premium compacts are pocketable — call it "more pocketable" if you must — and that difference is critical to most of the market, even if it isn't to you.
Then make your comments specific to
the G3 and not to MFT in general, as your comment below clearly is:
As for "m4/3 is not made to be pocketable", that is just because they can't be. If they could be, then Panasonic/Olympus would be laughing all the way to the bank.
They can be, and some of them
are . Personally, the G3 isn't pocketable
enough for me and so in regards to your point relative to the OP, I would have to agree that the G3 can't really challenge super compacts such as the G12, simply based on size. But in terms of the larger MFT universe, I totally can't agree with you. There are many options that are pocketable
enough to pose a challenge to the higher end compacts.
--
Sam Bennett
http://www.swiftbennett.com
http://www.flickr.com/sambennett/ 
