[david_choy58]

I'm a M8, E-3 and 5D user. As many people pointed out, the reason I went for 4/3 is all because of the lenses.

The top pro/pro lenses: 7-14, 12-60, 35-100, 50 macro, leica D 25, leica D 14-150, leica 14-50 are all really top quality lenses. You can use them wide open from wide to tele without much CA, vignetting and sharp corner to corner. For me, 4/3 is the closest standard to M8 + M lenses.

Yes, Canon + Nikon are both better in terms of noise performance. But whenever I use my 5D + 16-35mm II, I'm just not happy with the amount of vignetting and corner softness there. Wide open performance is just not as good as M lenses or 4/3. Also, Canon + Nikon lenses tend to be less saturated and with lower micro/macro contrast than 4/3 or Leica M lens. I know a lot of people will argue that nowadays, you can do it all in PP for saturation and contrast. But I do not agree. No matter how I tweak my 5D files with L lens, I just cannot get the same look as my M8 + M lenses (e.g. image not as 3D). I think overall, 4/3 (E3) is a good partner with M8. The camera IS and anti-dust work well, lenses are well built and really top quality (only down side is $$, but I guess we're all used to expensive lenses for M8..haha). Together with the 25mm lux, it's an excellent package in low light. It's also a small package given what it can do. With 2 lenses, you can have a range of 24mm to 400mm or even 600mm. ISO peformance up to 400 is not worse than any other APS-C competitors. Especially, with 25mm lux + IS, you can actually use lower ISO....as no other DSLR packages give you that (maybe Sony 35mm 1.4 G + IS, but the IS just does not work as well as the sensor size is larger). Honestly, any ISO higher than 400 is not that usable anyway (at least for me). For my 5D, maybe I'll go as far as ISO 640, but if you really go for image quality, why would you use such high ISO. It's best to use large aperture lens or tripod. I think my 5D + 50mm 1.2 L does about the sames as my E-3 + 25mm lux in low light....just because of the IS advantage (2-3 stops) and I can use much lower ISO. But the overall "look" of the image - I prefer E-3 + 25mm lux. Just more 3D, moody, smoother bokeh..etc....afterall, it's a Leica (QC) lens.

So, I'd strongly recommend you to go fo E-3 with the top pro/pro or leica D lenses. Honestly, sometimes, I think a lot of people these days just go for FF body without thinking what the whole system can do. FF, APS-C, 4/3 all have their pros and cons. There will be a market for all these 3 standards in the future. A lot of people think FF is the way to go....but just think about the $$ and lens size you have to deal with for FF. Not every one will be prepared to pay and carry that much for a camera / lens. In fact, I think FF is best to use primes. Just lighter and better corner performance. That's why I go for all L primes for my 5D except 16-35mm II as I need UW. So, afterall, it's not so flexible, I might as well use my M8. Also, for tele, 4/3 is lighter/smaller....APS-C is always going to be the mass market and 4/3 will try to compete with it by providing some smaller alternatives (e.g. E420). Can you imagine if Olympus continue to bring out pancake lenses for E420. It's about the same size as the M package!!!

So, having own a FF, 4/3 and M8 camera.....I appreciate all 3 standards. But if I have to choose 2, I'd go for M8 + 4/3. Just more flexible, light weight and most importantly, I like the glass more. I would not go as far as saying that Olympus top-pro lenses are probably the best Japanese lenses but not a lot of people appreciate that. The correction of these lenses are just amazing, no CA, very little distortion, wide open performance is almost the same as stop down, same performance from wide to tele, weather sealed, nice 3D look, good contrast, good saturation....etc....what else do you need. But prepare to pay for them!!!