Many thanks for your replies Joe - as usual full of interesting facts backing up intelligent opinion.
I am still very uncertain about which system/brand is my best bet for the future, but, of course, that is the nature of the beast - rapidly advancing technology mixed with commercial pressures and secrecy - and, moreover, this problem is more down to my psychology than your excellent explanations! I realise that, in practise, the only sensible strategy is to get the system that most closely meets my requirements and is available
today and accept that in the future some other system may become better for my needs and re-appraise the situation at that time. Planning ahead at the moment is virtually impossible.
The source of my difficulty is, to a large part, down to the fact that even today there is
no system of any brand that fully meets my requirements and the uncertain future only compounds the problem. Anyhow, enough of this navel gazing ...
I think Canon will produce something like Nikon's DX lenses.
(It won't be EF-S. EF-S is not Canon's DX. In Nikon terms, it's
like the old IX Nikkors for the APS film SLRs. By altering the
mirror design of the 300D dRebel, the lens rear element can
protrude farther into the sensor chamber, so a really low cost kit
lens can zoom a little farther into the wide angle range).
So Nikon's DX lenses and your suggested Canon lenses are/will be only partially digital in as much as they cater for a smaller image circle but still assume a full sized 35mm refel mirror. So even these lenses (and the bodies with which thet are designed to be used) are unnecessarily large.
For example, I have just ordered a Canon 17-40mm f4 L lens for use with my 10D, and then I look at the Olympus 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 lens. The Olympus lens has a wider (and more useful for my needs) zoom range - exceeding the Canon at both ends and a superior maximum aperture, and yet it is also smaller (in both length and diameter), lighter and takes smaller filters (which has significant cost implications if several filters are used). The lenses have similar build quality (both weathersealed) and from what I have seen the image quality is also similar.
The one advantage of the Canon lens is that it has a larger image circle and so, in the future, can be used with larger sensors, but I have no interest in a larger sensor per se. I would only buy a body with a larger sensor if Canon made it impossible for me to buy the same specced body with a smaller APS or 4/3 sensor, since the image quality of the latter are now, and will be in future, perfectly acceptable (in comparison with a larger sensor constructed with the same technology).
2. Has Nikon decided to settle on APS sensors and DX lenses or will
it jump to full frame some time in the future? (At present Nikon
appears to be more committed than Canon to APS sensors.)
I think they will do what Canon did, a ful frame that sells in the
10's of thousands of units, while the APS sized cameras sell in the
millions.
So, even if I jumped ship (back) to Nikon now I would be no better off in the long-term, apart from the fact that Nikon does have a better range of DX-type lenses than Canon.
I think 4/3 will be a long term success. The small sensor is "good
enough" for an awful lot of purposes, and the ergonomics and build
are great on the camera and some of the lenses. I don't see anyone
other than Oly building bodies, though.
I'm interested that you think 4/3 will be a long term success - I wish I had your confidence. If I did then I might well pick up the phone now, cancel my order for the Canon 17-40mm lens and replace it with an order for the Oly E-1! (The only other thing that stops me doing this is the lack of long telephotos (with IS) for 4/3 - the Oly 300mm f2.8 does not count as it is ridiculously expensive!)
My doubts about the long term success of 4/3 are not technical related (I have no doubt that that the 4/3 sensor is indeed "good enough" and in the future will be able to support higher pixel counts and lower noise). No, my doubts are purely commercial - are enough people buying the E-1 to sustain Oly's research and sustain the production of new improved bodies and lenses (both from Oly and third parties, such as Sigma)?
I don't think there is a "best" system, near or long term.
I should say that I meant "best" purely in terms of my personal requirements - requirements differ from person to person and so there is not, and never will be, an overall "best" system.
Again, thanks for you help Joe.
Terry.
