Image courtesy: Amos Chapple.
Amos Chapple is a Pro Photographer using Micro Four Thirds cameras and lenses. He sent me a new mail I am posting here as it is:
“Italian Vanity Fair magazine have been buying my work fairly regularly and have used four images of mine in the past four months. Two images have been used as double-page spreads. The magazine runs a tight ship; image quality is thoroughly checked before they print things, and guess what? All of it was shot with M43 kit 🙂
Here is a link to the proofs: http://imgur.com/a/EHdbq
All pics taken with a [shoplink 16254]GH2[/shoplink]. Most of these images have also been used in newspapers and magazines throughout Europe including the Guardian, Daily Mail etc.
I don’t think the image quality of M43 is as good as full-frame DSLRs but it’s nice to know that if you’ve got good content you can use M43 kit without worrying about the sensor size.
All the best for now, keep up the great work!”
This is just to say once again that if you have talent you can achieve superb results with any camera system. No need to go Full Frame to be a PRO 🙂
—
Private note: I am back from the mountains and will live for four months in Antwerpen. Will be back in my isolated place on the Pyrenees in France by February.
79 Responses
NIce work!!!!
Great work-i really like the “epic” composition on this shots-and even when i only take pictures for fun, good to know that your not stoped by your gear.
While you don’t NEED to go full frame to churn out a few great images of already stunning imagery to that can be bought as professional work, those that DO shoot with professional-performing equipment tend to do it more reliably and consistently.
Matt, that’s rubbish. The only thing that a FF sensor does better is a lower S/N ratio (just), and a shallower DOF at a given aperture.
A PDAF DSLR is better for sports type work or birds in flight, but thats about it as far as online or magazine images go.
It’s now about the photographer, not the gear.
Oh wait, wasn’t that always the case?
For every pro using mFT there will be a thousand using Nikon or Canon. The best FF cameras compared to the best mFT camera clearly demonstrates why this is the case the D800 compared to the E-M5 is better in every single category. The D800 has the same DR at ISO 800 as the E-M5 at base.
I am a London based concert photographer and sell my work all over the world. I love the convenience and weight advantage of mFT and I would honestly like to say wow my E-M5 is just as good as my D4 or D800 but that is not the case. For my specific use, the mFT cameras are lacking in many ways, low light AF, poor tracking, noise and critically lens choice.
For the vast majority of photographic uses the mFT gear does wonderfully, FF cameras are specialist tools and they come into their own at the extremes {shallow DOF, very high DR, resolution, high ISO and so on}. The fact that the admin scours the net to find a sprinkle of photographers who use mFT on a pro basis does not change this {a couple of days ago he posted a link to someone’s holiday snaps!}.
A major advantage of Canon and Nikon pro users is the worldwide pro services network, with all the bells and whistles. We are in a time of change and there is no doubt things are changing but the smaller sensor still lags behind the FF models. Though I expect things to get better as the years go on, I think the 1 inch sensor from Nikon and Sony could cause a revelation in the small camera high quality market in years to come.
Yeah, I guess you do need a pro network when nikon releases the D800 with a left focusing problem and canon releases the 5DIII with internal light leakage (that they fixed with tape!). That inspires confidence for sure.
So if I can buy (3) GH3’s for the same price as one 5DIII and the GH clobbers the canon in video performance, just what am I paying canon the extra for again? I think I’ll stick with having two hot spares in the trunk.
+1 I agree. Btw, I was the only photographer at the Venice Film Festival using an OmD coupled with the glorious 75mm. Pro photographers stared at me like I was just sh%t. Then someone noticed what my little, tiny sensor can do, and was really angry looking at his FF beast. (I don’t consider myself a pro and it was my first time on a red carpet among pro shooters)
I just picked up the 75mm yesterday. Wow, what a work of art that thing is.
Hey Mymaco, post up a couple pics, that 75mm is wicked!
Yes that sounds plausible pro shooters dont give a damn what anyone but them is shooting jesus Oly fanboys strike again.
The pro photographers I know talk about the WORK, not the gear, whether it’s Hasselblad, Nikon or Canon.
+1
agree!!!
ohh only 75mm +omd great cool ,shit
can do everywhere ,everytime likes GH2.
Very true, but when they more regularly see me with the small (m)FT gear and they know my results (my local colleagues) they DO get curious about the gear.
Cool story bro.
@tron there are production issues with all cameras , I had to send my E-M5 back due to some mad fault with the LCD it had a pink/red colourcast { not subtle either lol}.I wasnt a happy bunny but chit happens.The D800 is a superb instrument and the results I have seen from a couple of the guys at my camera club really are amazing.
Not knocking FF, just the perception that you must walk through the door with something big, heavy and expensive in order to get the job done. That is just a bunch of crap. In the 35mm analog days everyone shot with the same sensor (film) and photography was results oriented, not gear obsessed.
+1000
@Tron
In my country, several E-M5 bodies were sent back to our authorized dealer for fixing buttons and broken LCD frame. This is the same problem that happened to E-P3.Perhaps you don’t know.
And the left-focuse issue of D800 was resolved several monthes ago. However, for Canon, I don’t know. To me, high-end products can cause problems during the post-release period. It is not a surprise. Even, in my company (Big software house), we still detect bugs in our very complicated software solutions no matter how much effort we put on our quality control process.
You forgot to tell that bigger format has light gathering advantage only when you can afford shallow DOF.
More stopping down to avoid too shallow DOF evens light gathering difference between formats. (higher pixel count bigger sensor actually receives less light per pixel in that situation)
Also in landscapes needing big DOF D800 definitely becomes easily diffraction limited in resolution… In which case amount of real information in image can be only same as in E-M5’s image.
Diffraction is simply nasty bitch: With same framing and DOF all diffraction limited systems, regardless of format, have same maximum amount of image details.
While huge majority of “pro” bodies are in 35mm format that’s only because of choises done by camera makers.
It was simply the smallest format in which analog film performed well enough for most uses in resolution and sensitivity and stuck because of that but with digital sensors APS-C has greatly exceeded that level. Most people, including many corporate big shots just haven’t gotten over that fact.
Tracking capable AF is definitely one major point in some uses but that problem is format size neutral.
Also in case of income depending on camera that professional level support is surely important but also that comes from other things than technical factors of formats.
Maybe in year or two we have lot more diversity in choises instead of being limited by film era.
@esa as to diffraction limiting all camera formats are affected by diffraction at the same DOF F8 on mFT will have the same effect as F16 does on FF ie roughly a 10% drop in resolution which considering how much the D800 has is not exactly a disaster.
Not forgetting that the areas that typically demand a lot of DOF are very often shot at wide angle, where even in FF DOF is pretty huge. Plus if this was as important a deal as some mFT users suggest, then P&S cameras would be stars lol. I must admit the 1 inch sensor format interests me the future of it could be really small cameras , more DOF is always better right lol
Matt, the hardest part of travel photography is the getting there. Having small cameras means a lot .
@Donton No its not rubbish. FF camera’s like the D3, D4 and 1D MKSomething are more reliable and tougher.
Does your photography put food on your table? Cause if not your opinion on professionals doesn’t matter. At all. To anyone.
Matt, the most common failure I’ve witnessed is when a “Pro-Performing Camera” gets a bent pin in the CF slot. Shuts everything down, right then and there. Really funny how I’ve never had any issues with m43 cams and their SD cards.
Let’s see number of bent pins I’ve personally heard from sources which can be considered as reliable and not fashion consumers/butterfingers… nada.
You are clutching at straws now lol the D800 has two slots one of which is you guessed it an SD slot. Though I have never had a CF card fail in all the time I used them I have however lost a bloody SD card
No body I know has bent a pin.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/lensrentals-repair-data-january-july-2012
Scroll down to “a word about cameras”:
@Tron
That’s weird. I, and includinging all of my friends, never had such a problem (CF pin).
Awesome work from Amos, “Go Kiwi!”.
Amos, are the NZ papers too cheap to employ photographers these days? I notice that most internet articles use random “Thinkstock” images currently.
It is good to know that this format is good enough for images and publications like these.
“This is just to say once again that if you have talent you can achieve superb results with any camera system.” Indeed, that was always so, is now and always will be so.
m4/3 has always been good enough for A3 spreads, I’ve sold many m4/3 images (12MP and 16MP) that have been put to such use. Its always the picture, the skill of the photographer and rarely the camera.
David Bailey used to shoot for Vogue on 35mm which they didn’t like, saying that they needed MF quality. He used to have the negatives duped up to MF and they were perfectly happy.
Amos’s pictures are superb and I’m sure will have reproduced beautifully.
Its the manufacturers who want us to be continually dissatisfied and we will be, only if we let them. Interesting that this was posted on the day I decided to leave the big Nikons at home and went out shooting (for stock) with an E-PL3 and an E-PM1. Absolutely no issues whatsoever with the quality.
> David Bailey used to shoot for Vogue on 35mm which they didn’t like, saying that they needed MF quality. He used to have the negatives duped up to MF and they were perfectly happy.
Indeed average people usually don’t know anything and just keep repeating (usually old) religious dogmas.
Would be good bet that in many situations 4/3 sensor image masqueraded as 35mm image would go fully through those insisting “full frame” quality.
Yup the cameras ARE good enough. Problem is many photographers hide their fears and lack of skills behind a big camera.
Want to get better photographs? Become a better photographer.
THIS! 12345
Exactly right. I use GH2s on my video shoots and never hear any complaints about the results. There’s really something liberating about not caring what anyone thinks about your gear. Plus I can fit it all into a single carry-on for easy traveling. I would really like to see Panny or Olympus release a weather-sealed, fast telephoto zoom to round out the kit though. Perhaps a 100-300mm F2.8 that is able to take drop-in filters.
Come on man, cameras and lenses are tools sometimes you need one and sometimes the other. I have seen the posts “its about the photographer equipment doesnt matter ” and it is BS. If i head for a concert with P&S with a dog slkow lens and a miniscule sensor my livliehood is on the line.Pros in any area be it machanics of golfers use the best tools for the job it is that simple.
Now there are plenty of scenarios where you can use mFT and do a fine job , but no system does it all
@Dap. You are right, “No one system does it all.”. Amos also said more or less the same thing in the header. The point is, CSC are good enough to do most things for most end users. As you say, it will improve.
Really, most disagreements over camera gear is just hair splitting. For my amateur usage, I’m happy with my E-PL1 mostly. If I was to start selling images landscapes likely), I might consider an upgrade. Of my lenses first though!
Where I tend to take people to task is when they say “this picture would have been better with a FF/APSC/DSLR pro cam of X or Y brand. Get real. The photographer spotted the scene, took the image with the tool he had, and used his previous experience to maximise the IQ according to his vision. I doubt that Amos could/ would lug a FF DSLR to most of the places he goes. Nor would the locals feel as comfortable with him. Horses for courses, sure. Stay on a relevant couse, you and Amos aren’t shooting the same work in the same environment!
“This is just to say once again that if you have talent you can achieve superb results with any camera system. No need to go Full Frame to be a PRO :)”
exact. my professional works is also 95% four thirds and micro four thirds.
Is all about looking for the geometries and waiting for the right lighting.
Y
M43 kit. Does that mean kit lens as well? 14-42 or something else? The 14-45 seems to be pretty good for landscapes so would be interesting to know.
great photography, if only more clients would just concentrate on the actual quality they get from the photogapher, instead of making demands about the gear used or resolution of the file.
I wonder what lenses he uses on his GH2?
@Admin, good luck with returning to the city. The four months will fly by in no time!
Thanks! I am in Wuerzburg now making a stop. Will be in Antwerpen tomorrow 🙂
About 90% of my paying jobs is now done using m4/3.
Back to the Pyrenees in February: admin is a hard man.
I simply love to live a simple live. No distractions, no non-sense needs, no need to prove anything to anyone. But I love arts and meeting people. That is what I like about Antwerp and cannot find on the montains. I am really happy to live in the city from time to time!
Make a stop at Folkwang Museum in Essen on your way to Antwerpen.
Im Farbenrausch – Munch, Matisse und die Expressionisten
http://www.folkwang-im-farbenrausch.de/de/ausstellung/ausstellung.html
It is all about dynamik range. 🙂
And in a week: in Lünen
Internationales Naturfoto-Festival der GDT 2012
26. bis 28. Oktober 2012
I will be in Berlin in February…
I think I remember seeing the photo of your place in the mountains… Just amazing…
I wish I could have your lifestyle… maybe in about 3 years or so…
If that doesn’t work out, you can always get a hopped-up Ford Falcon coupé and hit the ouback. 😉
sounds like admin is enjoying life, except when he is here 😉
In the US, I know Panasonic is getting a pro services network set up. Olympus already has pro services for their standard four-thirds line, and their support network is much better than Panasonic’s at this point.
I’m a Nikon FX shooter and yes Nikon full frame is better at most things than M43. Saying that, I do use my M43 kit for work and it slots in nicely for certain applications, where I feel FX might be too bulky or too intrusive. They both have their place in a pro’s bag!
For me the major advantage of present FF cameras (mainly from Nikon) is about 2 stops higher dynamic range/color depth and partly shallow DOF. Other things (noise, tracking) are not conceptual, owing the fact that I began as a film photographer and compared to film even G2 has a lead in noise. Hopefully, there is potential to increase dynamic range in the M43 sensors and this property will finally converge.
Wonderful images, more power to m43 when skilled photographers like Amos use it to create such quality work!!
Sure, you dont need “FF” to produce great images. But then theres always that thing..
Wouldnt those images be better if I had FF? Or MF? Or 4×5 film?
They would be, at least from technical point of view..
Ansel Adams could shoot 35mm, or even half-frame if he wanted. But he didnt. Im quite positive that if he would live today he would use Phase One.. or same stuff he used before as there is no substitute for 8×10 film. Its not just details, but DR, tonality, gradients.. and last but not least “look” of photo.
Just because people can create art with m4/3 cams it doesnt make m4/3 cams best for the job. It makes them just good enough. But then.. so is Nokia N808 or iPhone 4. If you get my point.
m4/3 users are sometimes like sexual minority, they always need to “prove” themselves, or propagate themselves. But if you do need something like that, you have problem, not your camera or majority of users.
@Daemonius, that is very well said, there are wonderful images coming from all kinds of cameras. The thing is for certain types of photography some cameras perform better. I suspect that for example sport shooters are not masochistic and carry all the heavy gear just to enjoy the pain it gives them lol, the combinations of super rugged , high speed bodies like the D4 with its excellent high ISO combined with complicated customisable AF with equally excellent fast lenses makes them an obvious choice. I am very happy as is my wallet that I have no interest or need for fast long telephoto lenses as it can be a very expensive area of photography.
I prefer to look at the pictures and not the kit that took it. I have good looking shots taken with the 7D and E-M5. Each caters to different situations.
The kit helps you get the shot and this is why I spend alot on quality glass. It just brings out the full potential of the camera.
I’ve played with a D4 and the image quality is astonishing. If you can afford it and don’t mind lugging it around with you then go ahead. It’s worth it.
Nice pics by Mr. Chapple.
To be honest, they could have been done with D3200 24mp. That camera is only a bit heavier and larger than GH/OMD.
The important point to remember is that APSC DSLR is till the best game in town for enthusiasts in terms of cheap fast WA zoom. There is a mutitude to choose from by Canikon/Sigma/Tokina.
If you need a good wireless flash system on the run, then the D7000 etc would be the ticket. The D600 shares the same body as the D7000.
Are you real ?
http://camerasize.com/compact/#317.353,289.30,ha,t
You cannot seriously think it’s “ALMOST” the same size. Or maybe you are “ALMOST” serious ?
I find the D5100 + 70-200 to be quite light compared with D3.
IMO, the real comparison is between PEN/GF/N1 and OMD/GH. The former is pocketable.
But the comparison was between an e-m5 and your suggested alternative which YOU claimed was only slightly bigger. Sure both are smaller then a D3.
Maybe you have tiny pockets, but I currently have an e-m5 with 17/2.8 in a pocket of my coat, and the 25/1.4 and 45/1.8 in other pockets of that same coat and the 12-50 in a small pouch hanging from my belt. There is abslutely no way whatsoever in which the D5100 can be made to fit.
But you know what, you go buy a D5100 and be happy, and I’ll use whatever I like. There are cases where that D5100 will be better, but first of al those all concern extreme situations or situations where good tracking is absolutely required. You do however also have that camera with you and that can be a bit of an issue.
Well, not sure if a GH/OMD can be considered a pro camera if it doesn’t have good tracking? IMO, a pro camera needs to be versatile. Taking low light pics at night. Then, moving objects during the day. Shallow DOF in another situation.
Then, landscapes in adverse conditions. As well as wireless pics in the field.
For versatile shooters, the weight and size of a pro camera is an acceptable cost.
I’m sure that there are some pros who are happy with OMD/GH. Just as there are pro still using Leica and film.
The important thing to remember is that the standard for a pro camera has been set by Canikon. Nothing wrong if you just take landscapes. My point is that you can use a D3200/D5100/D7000 with a wide choice of lenses.
In the end, it is the image that matters. The choice of a brand and camera usually comes down to indidvidual preference. Bearing in mind that certain cameras have set the standards for certain types of situations.
That totally depends.
If you are a ‘pro’ sports or wildlife photographer then not having good focus tracking is unacceptable.
If you do portraits, weddings, events, landscapes and what not, there is absolutely no need whatsoever for tracking.
There are a whole bunch of things that many professionals want from the tool they use a lot, including things such as ruggedness, a certain image quality and all that. Those are all bulletpoints on a checklist when designing a camera intended for professional use, but, in the end there is really only one factor that decides if something is ‘pro’, and that is it being used to earn a living.
Let me just close this by pointing out how Ansel Adams didn’t require ‘tracking’ on his cameras, as a matter of fact, they weren’t ‘autofocus’ either.
Oh since ‘edit’ doesn’t seem to be working.. there is something to add.
Why do you keep changing your argument?
You were talking about a D5100, which is not designed or sold as a pro camera by any stretch (which doesn’t mean it can’t be a ‘pro’ camera for certain people however).
When getting corrected about the size, your counter is asking how an OM-D or GH3 can be a pro camera without tracking? What does that have to do with anything whatsoever that was being discussed?
Your original arguments:
1. E-M5 is about as big as D5100, neither is pocketable
2. PEN is pocketable
So when people point out, with picture, how the E-M5 is in fact a lot smaller then a D5100, you start about weight, and how you can shoot single-handed with either?
Sure, that could all be, but has totally zero to do with the evidently wrong argument you were making.
To me, it seems totally clear actually what you are doing, no matter what the question is, and what the requirements are, people should buy a Nikon, preferably full-frame, and you’ll try to weasel your way out of any argument not going your way and try to ignore how you have been shown wrong on your original argument, for that matter, even repeating the argument to others after it has been clearly demonstrated that your argument was wrong.
Those pics speak volumes (especially the Nikon pic..). The difference between any Nikon DSLR and the OMD is really huge looking at that pic. I knew there was some difference but this is astonishing. I wonder how anyone can say that these two cams are moreless the same size…
For me, the difference in weight and size is small. I can shoot either with a 50mm lens with one hand. Can’t do that with a D800/D3.
For me, the key difference comes with the PEN/GF/N1. With a small lens, these cameras can be put into a pocket all day.
An E-M5 with 17/2.8 does fit my pocket totally fine, an D5100 with 50mm does not fit it at all.
For that matter I already mentioned that in a previous reply to you.
GH3? nope, won’t fit, neither will a GH2 btw.
Now, in the space in which you can fit that D5100 with 50mm lens, I can fit an E-M5, 25/1.4 and 45/1.8 easily, probably can fit the 14/2.5 or 17/2.8 as well in that space.
Shall we draw a few more useful lenses into the picture? It will only make things worse for the D5100 (size wise).
I think the OMD is far better also. Weathersealed, has a tiltable screen, has a far larger EVF, Shoots 9 fps, has better IQ than the D5100. BUt okey, the D5100 is getting old. So that is to be expected. It was okey, but currently for most it is for too large for what it delivers. If we look at the pics, as I said: the D5100 is like a mobilephone from 1993 compared to a current one.
In certain aspects it is better yes, in others it is not, for example continuous focus/tracking. If that is relevant is a question one can only really answer for oneself.
It really all depends on what you do and how you like to do what you do.
You know what I really like? That m4/3 is actually getting compared to FF. I mean, they are essentially different leagues, it’s just that the m4/3 system is more accessible.
I’m not saying either one is better than another but m4/3 must be doing something right if it’s getting compared to a different league. It’s becoming it’s OWN league!
Agreed, bb. When we’re starting to debate over reasons why FF is still the choice for pro’s, that speaks volumes about the quality of the m4/3 lineup.
Youre all talking like the em5 is the only pro level m4/3 option, but these images were taken using a gh2!
And according to Olympus, the E-M5 is not a ‘pro’ camera.
There is currently only one m4/3 camera that has been designed as a ‘pro’ camera, and is being marketed as such, and that one is not yet available, the GH3.
For me, the moral of the story is that we are at a point where the acceptable level of quality for ‘some’ pro jobs seems to be achievable with m43 gear (as proven by Vanity Fair). Many years ago this level was only achieved with the best full frame camera of the day.
Magazine pages are still the same size, and online content is shown at low resolution, so in some respects the acceptable level of quality (again, for some pro jobs) has reminded constant and camera technology has caught up. Perhaps there will be a shift again and only 2012 level full frame can do the job.
That is not to say that I believe m43 doesn’t lag behind full frame – just that it is at a point that is good enough in some situations.
In the same way that full frame is not necessarily as good as medium format for some jobs, but it is good enough, and hence is chosen by pros to do the job.
It is likely that one day we will see camera phones taking photos with the same quality of a first generation full frame digital camera. If they were good enough at the time, and the standard is the same, it makes sense that the camera phone will be a good enough tool.
Click, that has been going on since the very early days of photography.
The ‘pro must be full-frame’ dogma is about as valid as what was said a mere 25 years ago: ‘pro must at least be medium format’. Both are rubbish, pro should use whatever gets the job done efficiently and with sufficient quality. Going overboard on either just means spending money with zero return on investment.
Since the resolution of our eyes didn’t all of a sudden improve, the quality requirements for a specific print size viewed at a specific distance are not changing beyond a certain limit because any increase over that limit will only mean having to push more data, without any gain. That is simply a waste of memory and time.
That doesn’t mean there is no place for ‘full frame’ or medium format or even larger formats, rather, there definitely are applications requiring what such larger formats can provide.
Let me rise above the nitpicking with a critique.
First, I am sympathetic to M43 because it is the new kid on the block. Consumers need more brand competition.
Second, I have been critical of M43 where its shortcomings are critical.
For example, I gave the heads up on the new Sony sensors. I was crucified for saying that the existing Pany sensors were unacceptable. Now, OMD uses the same Sony technology. Everyone can see the virtues of Sony sensors.
I have two pieces of advise to the M43 community.
Firstly, it is chasing a red herring when it is claimed that OMD etc are pro cameras. They do not have the versatility required of pro cameras. And, Pany and Oly will not invest in the project. Pany is interested in video. Oly doesn’t have the money to throw around.
Secondly, it is wrong to suggest that OMD is the right camera for you if a pro uses it. IMO, APSC DSLR is still the sweet spot for enthusiast on a budget. M43 just can’t match the cheap fast zooms available to APSC DSLR.
That kind of pumping is dishonest. I hope that serious photographers will show it for the lie it is.
What does M43 have to do in order to advance itself from the start-up stage? The focus must be in the consumer price points ($400-$700) currently dominated by NEX. M43 has to be able to sell a lot of cameras at a strong average selling price.
OMD, as a headline camera, is okay for the old Olympus faithful. But, how many are there?
Currently, there is some leakage from Canikon to M43. But, Canikon will convert their consumer DSLR to mirrorless when all the elements are in place. And, they will be very competitive.
Currently, M43 is the shining star because Canikon are slow to join MILC. But, that will change when Canikon make their big move.
Let me rise above the nitpicking with a critique.
First, I am sympathetic to M43 because it is the new kid on the block. Consumers need more brand competition.
Second, I have been critical of M43 where its shortcomings are critical.
For example, I gave the heads up on the new Sony sensors. I was crucified for saying that the existing Pany sensors were unacceptable. Now, OMD uses the same Sony technology. Everyone can see the virtues of Sony sensors.
I have two pieces of advise to the M43 community.
Firstly, it is chasing a red herring when it is claimed that OMD etc are pro cameras. They do not have the versatility required of pro cameras. And, Pany and Oly will not invest in the project. Pany is interested in video. Oly doesn’t have the money to throw around.
Secondly, it is wrong to suggest that OMD is the right camera for you if a pro uses it. IMO, APSC DSLR is still the sweet spot for enthusiast on a budget. M43 just can’t match the cheap fast zooms available to APSC DSLR.
That kind of pumping is dishonest. I hope that serious photographers will show it for the lie it is.
What does M43 have to do in order to advance itself from the start-up stage? The focus must be in the consumer price points ($400-$700) currently dominated by NEX. M43 has to be able to sell a lot of cameras at a strong average selling price.
OMD, as a headline camera, is okay for the old Olympus faithful. But, how many are there?
Currently, there is some leakage from Canikon to M43. But, Canikon will convert their consumer DSLR to mirrorless when all the elements are in place. And, they will be very competitive.
Nice try, but I won’t bite. You are delusional on one hand and you are into polemics on the other. That is not my problem. I can use my time on more constructive things with more constructive and honest people.
A pro can get versatility by having equipment specialized at various jobs instead of by a ‘one-size fits all’ solution. Its ‘prosumers’ and ‘shoestring pros’ who can’t afford to go that way and do need a one-size fits all solution.
Oh and you don’t have to be sympathic to any system, that is just silly. Use it for its merits, or don’t use it if there is something that better matches your needs.