rethinking Micro Four Thirds in 2016

Alex Notpro wrote:

Does MFT still make sense for me in 2016?

These are my requirements for a camera system:

- There should be at least 2 cameras, one pocketable (like E-PM2) and one high-performance ergonomic camera (like E-M1)

What about GM5, GX8, GH4?

- All lenses and flashes should work well on both cameras

Don't they? I never use a flash.

- Would be nice if both cameras could take the same batteries (Olympus fails here)

Few do and it is a shame.

- Lenses must include a fast normal prime (50mm AOV), ultra-wide (14mm AOV) zoom,

14mm is NOT ultra-wide. 12mm isn't either. 10.5mm (21mm) and below is.

a fast normal zoom, a longish macro (105-120mm), a classic portrait prime (fast 85mm), a super-telephoto zoom, and a 35-50mm fast pancake prime. Nice-to-have a pancake normal zoom and a travel zoom (28-300). (MFT is king here)

If you look most of those lenses are mostly there. There IS a dearth of long primes and a long macro.

When I can't find native lenses to suit me, I adapt. On multiple levels. try it.

- Would be nice-to-have access to 35, 50, and 85mm prime f/1.4-equivalent apertures for special situations (MFT comes short here)

P 25mm f1.4 and P 42.5mm f1.2. Then there are the three Voigtländers that hits them all.

- Option to use high shutter speeds when needed (high ISO)

- Option to use low shutter speeds and low ISO when needed (OIS/IBIS)

You can't? Really?

- AF during video (E-M1 is ok)

It depends on what type of video you're doing. Manual focus is more reliable in many situations.

In particular, I'm wondering about A7II + A6300 or Canon 5DIII + M10 to replace E-M1 and E-PM2 respectively.

Thoughts?

What about Panasonic. Take a look. It could be enlightening.