Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Read my signature line...I think I know a thing or two about m4/3
VVVVVVV :lol:

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

I know that I enter dangerous ground when I assume things, but from your description am I safe to assume that when you say "focal plane" you mean "sensor size"?

If that's the case, I beg to differ, lens size is NOT directly correlated to the camera's sensor!!!!
The 4/3 camera uses exactly the same size sensor as the M4/3 camera.
Have you ever picked up a 4/3 camera and M4/3 camera at the same time, one in each hand?

Take the previous Olympus "flagship" and the current one,
Camera body only, the E-5 is 800 grams or 28.22 oz, the OM-D E-M1 weighs 497 grams or 17.5 oz - that's a whopping 303 grams or 10.72 oz difference.

I'm "picking" on one lens comparison only: 75-300mm M4/3 weighs 423 grams (15.1 oz). 70-300 4/3 weighs 630 grams (22.14 oz). That's almost 200 grams or 7 oz difference.

So yes, I agree that the Olympus M4/3 system is an excellent camera with the lowest weight, however, the Olympus 4/3 system, with exactly the same size sensor has a much heavier camera body and heavier, comparable lenses!

And I can take excellent quality photos with the M4/3 camera and lenses. As good as, if not better than with a 4/3 system.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Ultimately, I think they will overtake DSLR. As EVF tech improves, the advantages of lighter full frame mirrorless cameras will just make the choice no-brainer. Just as digital took over from film. the DSLR advantages you site are all based on current product availability. There is no technological or economic reason that mirrorless lenses cannot or will not be produced that rival or exceed what is currently available for DSLR.

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

Famous last words, I'm afraid...

About five years ago, one of my sons suggested that in the foreseeable future landlines would not be used for home-to-home phone service.
He was laughed at by his three brothers.
Well, guess what... Those three now have cell-phone only, they have discontinued their landlines.
And the one that made that suggestion, would like to give up his landline as well but lives out in the boonies where there is no cell-service.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

And you can produce full-function adapters. Right now there aren't very many of them, and they cost real money, but what is true today doesn't determine what will be true next year at this time.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

Yes, additional lens would be great for mirrorless.
But you can use all kinds of glass with these camera's.
I have a metabones adaptor for my Sony ($139) and it
works perfectly with my legacy Nikon lens. The fit to the
adaptor is perfect like it was part of the camera.
Yes these adaptors are all manual. I believe their are
some that have some communication Canon lenses.
Zeiss, Mitacon, voightlander all kinds of exotic and quality
lens brands only require an adaptor but work with your
mirrorless. Brian Smith well known photographer has a
great breakdown/review of all the lens you can use on his site.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

All other things, however, are not equal. With no mirror mechanisims in the way, you can bring the lens closer to the sensor. I believe this means you can construct smaller, lighter, more efficienct and, ultimately, less expensive lenses.

PHW Loc: Madison, WI

Do they have docking stations that make them as convenient as landlines?

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I am considering picking up the Sony A5000 with the kit 16--50 power zoom lens and the 55-210 zoom lens. Costco currently has it on special for $449.00, and that includes a case and a 16gb SD card. I know, the 5000 doesn't have an EVF, but I can live with that. My question about the camera is, how sturdy and reliable is it. I have limited experience with Sony cameras, so I don't know if they stand up well to rugged use. Are they long lasting, etc. Before I put down my money I'd appreiate some input here. Thanks.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I use this which allows me to use my standard land line phone:

Sprint phone connect 3
http://shop.sprint.com/mysprint/shop/phone_details.jsp?prodId=dvc8360001prd&deviceSKUId=84000014&flow=AAL&planSKUId=&ptn=&tabId=dvcTab1820005&defaultContractTerm=

PHW Loc: Madison, WI

This looks great!

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

Where? In their back pockets?
The only time that cellphone isn't in their pocket is while they're sleeping and the phone's battery is charging.

No, they don't. At least, I've never seen one in their homes.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Works great too...We bought into it, right before we built a house. We were able to easily transfer our existing land line number to sprint, then take the base station with us to our temporary home (4 months) then to our new house. And we still have the same number. $20 a month plus $4 in taxes beat the $35+ we were spending on a landline with out long distance. Now, long distance is included.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Have you ever used a camera without an EVF? I have Sony products and they are great, but I would not buy a camera again without an EVF. (I had a Nikon coolpix that I gave up on!) It is too hard to utilize the camera in the sun when looking at the screen, your arms get tired, and you will miss opportunities. But hey, do what you think is right. As far as Sony goes, the build is great, the images are sharp, and the colors are brilliant.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Thanks. The unfortunate thing is, I really want the A6000, but it's just beyond my budget. I may have to look in a different direction. But then again..........for the price, it just may be worth it. Still thinking.