I was blown away by a lot of what the E-M1 could do in such a compact package. I think its an amazingly innovative camera. Like I said in my post, if I didn't have 20 Nikon F-mount lenses and a D5500 body for travel already in-house, I could very easily have gone for that camera over my D500. I think the E-M1 is a bit smaller than even the D5500. But a bit heavier? Certainly it has better weather protection. I love the image stabilization, too. When you add all that, a few ounces here and there seem like an OK trade off.

So now I 'suffer' with the D5500 and the very light DX lenses and one fast prime for my travel kit. I'd love to get my hands on a friends M1 to give a thorough shake up in the field, however. Another camera that I have been impressed with this year is the Fuji XT-2. Definitely worth a look, as well. There is some great gear out there now.

Don't get the impression that the E-M1 is not up to snuff for pro work. The Olympus pro's who I've talked to seem fully satisfied with most features. The Internet troll who says otherwise is just a head case looking for a fight.

I have a Nikon D800 and D500 and I feel the same way as David.

But to take it further, if there's something that I can't do with these cameras, it's more on my skills that than the hardware. Canon gear is also awesome, although I have limited experience with the brand. Not because Nikon is any better, just because that's the brand I started with and developed on as a Tog.

If anyone has a recent APS-C or Full Frame camera from any major brand and feels they can't get the photos they want, maybe they should be looking to upgrade their photo skills rather than blaming the camera brand for not being innovative.

The brand wars are like a horse race. Nikon's up, then Canon's up, then Nikon is up again. Along the way innovators like Fuji, Panasonic and Sony come up with some truly great cameras. Hell even Samsung is innovating. In the end, if one can't produce a decent image with all the great stuff that's out there, it's probably not the gear.

I love the hardware that's out there these days and it's only gonna get better.

You seem to care what I prefer a lot, Tommy. And it also seems to really, really bug you that I do pro work. Why else would you be having a full-on temper tantrum about it?

They're great! I know what both of them are, so the camera worked and you did a good job of using it.

If you want to have some more fun, take a night school class or look up photo education on the Internet. Check out some free You Tube videos. Maybe something will click with you and you'll want to try doing the same kind of shooting.

Most important, have fun!!! If you like the results you are getting, then it's all good.

One of my favorite quotes is, "Never wrestle with a pig because, while you both get covered in poo, the pig actually enjoys it."

You can replace the word pig with 'internet troll' and I think that just about covers you, tdekany.

TD, What are you blathering about? Here's what I wrote. "All things being equal, I'll stay with Nikon APS-C for now. If I was starting fresh, it would be a toss up."

You went off over that? Dude you gotta stop with the coffee. LOL! Guess who isn't going to talk politics with you? And guess what else? I still prefer my 800 to the M43.

Lighten up Frances.

Did you READ what I wrote? I tested the camera and spoke with several OLY Visionaries, Trailblazers and a couple OLY Engineers, so I might just have a clue. I still disagree M43 produces a file that is as good as the D800 for my purposes. I really don't care what Zach Arias says about it. He has his own motivations for saying what he says. I will continue to work with - and recommend - the best tool for my purposes - as I see it.

Feel free to disagree, but it's kind of disappointing that you would call someone silly for disagreeing with you. Name calling shines a negative light on the strength of your argument and on you as a person.

I played with a prototype and was very impressed with it's small size, it's relative light weight, and the low light/stable long exposure capability (I only saw that in the camera, so it might not be as good as I thought). I like that it's almost silent for street photography. For me, this camera would shine as street camera, a low light camera and as a backup body for most professional work.

I gave it a thorough evaluation, as I was considering dropping my DX cameras as my travel and walk around kit. Even after looking at it, I went with a Nikon D500 for sports/nature and kept my D5500 for travel because I liked Nikon's capabilities and file size more, along with the compelling fact that I already have every lens I'll need for the Nikon and won't have to spend thousands more building a good lens kit with the OLY. I compare the M43 only to the APS-C (the Nikon DX System) because - in my opinion - neither the DX or the M43 can compare with my studio camera, which is Nikon FX (full frame.) Maybe one day they will, but not now.

Here are the downsides that I can think of for the OLY.

1. Image size. I hear a ton of people saying that the M43 format is fine for anything you could imagine, but I am STILL of the mindset that I can do more with my 36MP D800 chip than the comparatively tiny M43 chip. And I do put photos into print and galleries.
2. Price to replace an entire Nikon range of lenses for a new camera system.
3. Weight - when I compare this camera and the equivalent lenses to a Nikon D5500 system, there is no real weight advantage.
4. I would pass on the OLY for professional studio work and professional product photography (when compared to other systems.)
5. I am unsure about the OLY as a sports and wildlife camera. I think that depends on some of the newer, faster, long lenses they are putting out for it.

All things being equal, I'll stay with Nikon APS-C for now. If I was starting fresh, it would be a toss up.

There is an upside to lens creep. It's a great conversation starter. Just look down at your lens, then look at the person you wish to strike up a conversation with and say, "I so embarrassed... my lens must be happy to see you."

I found a Nikkor 18-200 VRI for sale at a flea market this summer for $50. It was kind of abused and needed a good home so I bought it. Even though someone had turned the zoom ring around 180 degrees and had mucked up the barrel enough to make it tough to turn through 100mm with one hand, it was still sharp and had a fast enough AF that I decided to send it in to Nikon to repair. For $180, they turned it into pretty much a new lens.

It is very sharp by my standards and has a wonderful range. It's now my walk around lens unless I'm being super sensitive about weight and then I go to a 18-55mm Nikkor. I also use the Tokina 11-16, Nikkor 55-200 and 35mm DX F/1.8 as my strictly DX lenses. i would recommend them for any photos that I am not considering for submission to a gallery (which I have done) and National Geographic (which I have not done.) You can get very nice bokeh doing portraits out towards the 200mm range.

This is a fine lens to use for most professional work that will appear on a computer screen, a CD cover or in a normal magazine (which I have done.) It is good enough for portraits, close in wild life, events, general landscapes and architecture (especially if you correct profiles with Lightroom software.)

If you are doing a lot of professional work for demanding customers, you might want to buy a few different, higher priced and lower ranged lenses to cover the range of this very utilitarian lens, but it is an excellent lens for most applications, and I'd recommend it for most people.

Yes, the more I think about it, GM was one the least relevant of so many who died this year. He really didn't do anything that I would call cutting edge or original, his music was catchy, at best and his message, well there was no message whatsoever.

When compared to others that died this year, he really wasn't much of a loss to society. Especially Bowie. GM had a chance to stand for something, even though he was far from the first out gay pop star. He didn't. He was maybe as cutting edge as Miley Cyrus, who just copies everything that Madonna did 30 years earlier, and not nearly as well. The dude just did formula pop music and t-shirts with big letters on them. Ick.

I'm really surprised at the question though, and I wonder if the OP thinks otherwise.

I'm American and guilty as charged. George Michael doesn't stand out to me as a topic I would discuss in a Photography BBS.

The guy has been out of the news for a long time and I don't think he made as much of an impact on US society as you might think. As for musicians/performers who died this year that I would put in front of G.M. in importance, I'd list:

1. David Bowie
2. Leonard Cohen
3. Prince
3a. Paul Kantner
4. Leon Russell
5. Merle Haggard
6. Vanity
7. Maurice White
8. Glenn Frey
9. Debbie Reynolds
.... George Michael

The guy did sell a lot of records at a time when popular music was especially vacuous, got 'high-profile arrested' a few times, and was a well regarded philanthropist. OK. But while his melodies and vocals were constant ear worms, his lyrics were fluffy and had no connection to real life. He was all about dancing and clubbing. His music was junk food compared to most others on the list. His legal drama was just childish stuff - getting caught with his pants down in public. Big deal.

Finally, they say he was big with charities. OK. Nice guy. Shame he died. See ya. Yawn.

Well really, if you are going to get a toy for the heck of it, get a Hassleblad H6D. It isn't on sale, but you get free shipping.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1244709&gclid=Cj0KEQiAv4jDBRCC1IvzqqDnkYYBEiQA89utonCmFnbRz0lSdfEf97klqNnOuxWqkyY-q_hH0--gKUMaAmw98P8HAQ&is=REG&ap=y&m=Y&c3api=1876%2C89827194362%2C&Q=&A=details

Here in Philadelphia, a city where residents take great measures to be nice, we make sure to pronounce every word taken from non-English roots as they were pronounced in their original language. We also take on an affected British accent when speaking English.

(Eye roll.)

It's a good thing I ain't speaking English. I'm speaking Merican.

Some of these are astounding!