nandbytes

Sorry double post - *deleted*

Not all Olympus bodies have only CDAF. Some use PDAF too.

Also dual pixel AF is not better than hybrid AF or vise versa. For example canons dual pixel AF is no where as good as Sony A9's hybrid AF...

Yes

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/182723848337

No need for apologies :) Sorry if I came across a bit too critical or harsh. Wasn't my intension at all. I am sure we both intend to find out what works best under what conditions. I'll eventually ...

looking at the sample you posted micro contrast wise ZA is better. You can quite easily notice the sky-blue is more contrasty with ZA than the GM. Your foreground is out of focus to say much about ...

I love my sunstars too. I find the Zeiss 16-35mm/4 not be too bad at tbh. But Loxia 21 and CV lenses (eg: CV15, 35mm/1.7)  are truly awesome at it. In fact CV produced very nice sunstars even wide ...

Your shots are not properly focussed.

If you tell me GM has one stop advantage I may take your word for it. But for claims like "2 – 2.5" stop advantage I'd like to see your pictures proving this. Otherwise I am calling this BS.

Deleted

I still own one of these. Great little device. Time to take it out.

It's available on A7 also and even on A6000. It's a feature that was borrowed from Sony a-mount, my A99 and A77 also had it.

Sent you PM.

for you depends on your use case. Considering money wasn't of issue... e-m1ii, Oly 60mm macro, 12-40mm/2.8 and a telephoto lens Focus stacking, amazing build and weatherseal that I'd be comfortable ...

Two very different lenses especially in terms of size. if size, AF speed and bokeh (mind you bokeh is subject to some extent) is of concern I'd get FE55. If lens speed, shallower DoF is of concern ...

Didn't say it wasn't a step up. In fact I am positive that it is. But ZA doesn't have smearing in corners either.

Perhaps you had a bad copy.