Panasonic and MFT in general fit my needs perfectly. Plus MFT in general, makes for a very small and light kit.
Yes, a Panasonic would be on my list, too. The smaller sensor with high pixel density would support my macro work in a very good way. I would keep the lenses I actually use for my Pentax system.
There's certainly a lot of menus! However, at least in my case, once I thought it through and set up the camera the way I wanted, including the Quick Menu, I almost never have to go back to the main menu system. And each Panasonic is very similar, I've had four, so once you've set up one your pretty much there.
I'm waiting to see tests of the Z lenses and will await larger selection before deciding.
Why is it surprising? It's a great system. Small and compact with great image quality.
Of course it is easy to dismiss Fuji and Sony as "hype" and "mediocre" if you have never owned and used one for an extensive period.
As already said, why surprising? M4/3 represents a different set of compromises from other currently available systems, and if those compromises suit you then it's an excellent choice - and if not there are lots of other excellent choices available.
No issues with Fuji - they have been making great cameras for a while. The Sony hype train is over the top and seems sickening. I doubt the cameras and system from Sony is that great as the images online don't look that much better than others, certainly not as much better given the huge hype.
Fair enough. I've got plenty of low light images from both the D750 and the M-10iii that look great up to ISO6400. There may be a little more noise in the Olympus but they still look great on a 4k monitor and at sane zoom levels. The 750 does pull away above that though.
