RobBobW

melgross said:

techno said:

Can someone tell me if this is a micro 4/3 system? I am not sure if the "full frame" has to do with that or not. As an owner of 3 micro 4/3 bodies, I would love to see more lenses come to the market.

Full frame always means the equivalent of a 35mm frame. About 24x36mm.

the truth is that these FF mirrorless cameras are going to kill 4/3. They are not that much bigger, but have far higher image quality. It will take some time, but it will happen. Both Sony and Canon’s APS-C mirrorless offerings are pretty small and light and have themselves eaten into the 4/3 market. They also offer higher quality IQ. What they don’t have as yet, is large native lens lineups. But they’ll get there.

FF mirrorless is not going to kill m4/3.  There is a growing segment of m4/3 users who have given up on FF and APS-C.  As someone who shoots Canon FF, APS-C and Olympus m4/3, there is precious little difference in image quality unless you go to extremely high ISO settings.  For most uses, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference.  The IBIS in the m4/3 lets you shoot at lower ISOs so you don't have to go as high in low light as you would with APS-C or FF.  The size and weight difference alone is worth moving to m4/3.  To go super telephoto (600 mm) with my FF rig, it weighs in at 2,465 gm.  My m4/3 equivalent rig weighs in at just 813 gm, 140 gm less than the FF body alone.  APS-C bodies as lighter than FF but the lenses are still big and heavy if they have optical IS, which is required for telephoto work.  I was originally interested in the EOS-R, as it is just a little heavier than the flagship Olympus EM-1 MII, but the lack of IBIS and outrageous price killed it for me.  I can get more capable cameras for less money from other manufacturers.  Too bad.