Next page: Sample Shots
COMMENTS
"The trouble with micro 4/3 (and compact digicams)"
You say that as if their sensors are in any way close to the same size. You can fit up to ten compact camera sensors on one 4/3 sensor.
Depth of field control on 4/3 obviously isn't as versatile as on 35mm, getting twice the DoF for the same f-number, but the idea that "pretty much everything is in focus, all the time" or equating it to compact camera sensors is simply wrong. So, so wrong.
best camera
... is the one which you can take the picture with - because it's with you. So it doesn't really matter how good other cameras are, if they are too big to be carried along. Some amateurs won't bother carrying anything bigger than average compact - micro 4/3 is just the right size for such target audience. Yet the sensor is big enough to give good picture in good light (i.e. low enough ISO). I've seen RAWs from GF2 and they are quite good, opposed to JPEGs straight from the camera (too many typical compact-like artifacts). Assuming you pair it with small lens (e.g. Panasonic 20/1.8) it is one sweet kit.
And of course, shooting with fixed focal lens has other benefits I won't elaborate on - few would understand. Mine is the one with camera in the pocket.
Target market?
I've never been quite sure who the market is for a camera like this. Interchangeable lenses, but a severe lack of controls? Who goes to all the trouble of carrying a bag full of lenses, but doesn't want to make manual tweaks to their settings?
I've been in the market for a small mirrorless interchangeable lens camera for some time, to sit in my jacket pocket when I can't be bothered lugging my SLR around. But just because the body is small, it shouldn't mean any less flexibility than an SLR.







IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Top 10 SIEM implementer’s checklist
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Enabling efficient data center monitoring