burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

4/3 has been dead for YEARS. They finally killed off the 4/3 lens line, since it had no sales.

Meanwhile, MICRO Four Thirds is state of the art, and gaining ground in mirrorless every day.

The Olympus OM-D EM-1 Mark II won dpreview.com's 2016 innovative camera of the year award.

The Panasonic GH5 will be a serious contender for the same award this year. It is THE go-to video camera in its price class, and its stills are impressive, too.

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

Obtained mine abt six wks ago, impressive little box. Purchased the 14-150 and 75-300 lens. Have an older E-3 with several lens. Bought the lens adapter to use the older lens, and they work very well on the new camera. I have a variety of cameras, and find this one to be usefull in most shooting environments. I am a generalist, and shoot just about anything. To be safe, rent one for a couple days, then decide. I don't think you will be disappoinred.

Jerry Coupe

I switched from a Canon 5D II to the EM-1 due to wanting to reduce size and weight. After two months I am very happy with the body and my choice of lenses. I purchased the Pro 12-100 and find it very sharp. I try to use low ISOs and small apperatures with a tripod much of the time. I also bought the Panosonic 100-400 and use it for some bird photography. It seems to perform well. I chose this over the Oly 300 f4 primarily for the versatility of the zoom range.

TrishV Loc: Now living on Whidbey Island, WA

I can't thank you enough for all the excellent information you have given - I will certainly check out the Panasonic GH.

TrishV Loc: Now living on Whidbey Island, WA

Many thanks for your input - it is most appreciated.

TrishV Loc: Now living on Whidbey Island, WA

Thanks for your input - I am pleased to hear about the ISO - so far I haven't done much stacking/bracketing of photos so that is something to look forward to.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

GH5 will be available later this month. GH4 is $800 less, and still available.

TrishV Loc: Now living on Whidbey Island, WA

Yes I saw that and I did do a comparison between the two and though the Panasonic sounds great but I am still leaning towards the Olympus but I do appreciate all your help in this.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The EM-1 Mark II is awesome. You just need to pick what fits your needs. It really helps to borrow or rent one and play with it. Then there are all the reviews to read, and the YouTube videos to watch, and the UHH users to PM...

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

I got my Mark 2 two days ago and I have spent the last two days studying the pdf manual and setting the camera up. The menu system on this camera is notoriously confusing and badly organized, but once you get the camera set up the way you like to work you can ignore the menus as everything important can be controlled with buttons, dials and levers. I set the Mark 2 up very much the same way I set up my E-M1 some time ago. The E-M1 is now my backup, so I want them to operate as close to the same as possible. It's a great little camera and the auto focus and frame rates are simply amazing. It is not as capable as the Panasonic GH5 promises to be at video, but video is not important to me. I also have a Panasonic GX8 which I will probably sell. I have a pretty wide range of lenses now: 12-35 Panasonic, 7-14 Olympus, 40-150 Olympus, 100-400 Panasonic and 14-140 Panasonic.

If you are into wildlife photography I highly recommend the Panasonic 100-400mm lens. It works beautifully on the OM-D E-M1 Mk II. Attached is a photo taken with this lens at its maximum range of 400mm which is the "equivalent" of 800mm on a full frame camera. [hand held, f6.3, 1/1000sec, ISO 800]

Black tailed train bearer (female)

(Download)

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Good assessment and gorgeous photo!

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Thanks Bill.

danieljcox Loc: Bozeman, Montana

Great summary of the pros and cons to MFT BurkPhoto.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Thanks, Dan! I think, after 40+ years of serious photography as a part of all my favorite roles in life, I have to be really objective about gear — as in, "What am I really trying to accomplish? What will be the most versatile, easiest to live with, and give me the results I seek?"

Actually, that's always been my major criteria set. I've used many different cameras and camera formats, all of which worked, and none of which was perfect in every respect. Some were better than others for the task at hand, and I chose those.

When I left the school portrait lab, where I created the training materials and trained photographers to use Canons and Nikons, I spent a few years reading reviews of various cameras. I joined a group on LinkedIn, run by Will Crockett, a well-known photo educator, consultant, and commercial photographer who I knew from various industry conventions I'd attended. At the time, I was looking at full frame gear, and then I ran across his group on "Hybrid Photography with Mirrorless Cameras".

Will and I got to chatting a bit, and he offered to loan me some gear. I tried a simple Panasonic Lumix G3, with the 8mm fisheye, a 20mm, and a 14-42mm zoom. It was enough of a demo to understand that there was a future in this mirrorless thing. It wasn't exactly what I needed, but it was getting there.

I ran into your blog, Dan, and read your extensive review of the GH3. That was pivotal. I started "saving my beans and boxtops." By the time I was ready, the GH4 was well established, and an easy pick. It helped that my daughter has a roommate who uses the GH4 as an independent filmmaker.

My goals were to:

Lighten the load, so I could travel without an extra checked bag.
Capture images at least as good as what I had been using previously (2011 top of line APS-C Canons and Nikons).
Use one system for stills and 1080P or 4K video, and have the "look" of the stills match the video.
Record really decent audio with a single sound system — in the camera.
Monitor the sound with headphones.
Have an electronic viewfinder for work in sunlight.
Do copy stand macrophotography and slide copying down to at least 1:1 (30mm macro does it).
Like the look of low light photos, at least to ISO 1600.
Adapt my old Nikkor film lenses, if need be.
Have top-notch lenses in ranges I was used to (24-70 and 70-200mm equivalent FF field of view).
Withstand hard knocks if need be.
Make images for the Internet, photo albums, and large prints at full "8x10 visual extinction resolution" (about 240 PPI) up to 20x15, with good interpolation up to 40x30.

Micro Four Thirds in general can satisfy all that. My GH4 has satisfied all that. The GH5 looks to be an order of magnitude better. On the Olympus side, the OM-D EM-1 Mark II is a different flavor of the same thing, with more stills emphasis, less video emphasis, better JPEGs, and yes, confusing menus.

I'm not a gear junkie. Photography has always been ONE part of what I do (which is to turn worthy thoughts into a stream of appropriate words and images that compel others to perform desirable actions of one sort or another). M4/3 has been the best camera tool I've ever used to do that.

As a former systems manager in the lab, I have always known that maximizing the utility of *one part* of an overall system without maximizing EVERY part of the system in balance to it — is wasteful. If you don't need a particular quality or feature in something, because you will never reap a benefit from it, why endure the cost of it (in all senses of that word, cost)?

That became my argument against owning full frame. I don't need ISO 6400, or >30 MP, or an optical viewfinder, etc. often enough to justify the *additional* weight, bulk, baggage fees, camera and lens cost, insurance, and back strain. When I do, I'll rent the stuff.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

This is really an impressive shot. The downloaded image really has a lot of detail.