but even then...the Sony NEX series has blown the Pen series out the water.
The older Pens are kinda meh, as they get Panasonic's leftover 12MP sensors. But the Panasonic 16MP m43 sensors aren't that far behind the entry level CaNikon DSLRs. Only when you step up to the Sony 16MP/24MP APS-C sensors (like the Nikon D5100/7000, NEX-5N, NEX-7) do you get a meaningful difference, and even then, only when you print very big prints and squint at them from close range.
And who even prints anymore? A HD screen is 1080p, or about 2 megapixels. Even a 4K screen is what, ~8.3MP and that's half the resolution that a top-end m43 sensor gives you. (And don't give me that "more MP lets me crop more" excuse, you should frame it right in the first place, plus cropping doesn't solve perspective distortion problems.)
Basically, m43's 16MP sensor is about where APS-C DSLRs were 4-5 years ago in image quality. That was already more than most people needed back then, yet all of a sudden it's not good enough? Even though many people never view their photos at more than 16x20" anyway, let alone 1080p? Whatever.
The failure of APS-C mirrorless is that lenses must be made bigger and overall they will always be bigger and heavier than m43 lenses because of the need to cover a larger sensor area. You will ALWAYS have larger/size weight if you go with a larger sensor, all else equal.
Conversely, sensors keep getting better, and m43 sensors 5 years from now will be roughly where APS-C sensors are today, if trends continue. So you get to have your cake and eat it, too: great small and light lenses with sensors that are already "good enough" and will only get better over time. Plus a potential price savings due to less materials costs for sensor and lenses.
==================
Bottom line:
m43 = balanced lens and body size, with sensors that are already as good as DSLRs of 4-5 years ago and will only get better.
APS-C = already overkill for many home users, will be even more overkill as time goes on, bigger size and weight of lenses. If we assume that m43 will soon give "good enough" image quality if it doesn't already, then the ONLY advantage APS-C has over m43 is DoF control. So you get to choose between somewhat better DoF control vs. size/weight/balance.
After seeing what 45/1.8 and 25/1.4 lenses can do on m43 (good DoF control and bokeh), I'm happy to give up a little DoF control in favor of size/weight/balance advantages of small m43 bodies paired with small lenses. A little NEX body with a huge lens is just nasty to balance and heavier/larger than m43, to the point where I'd rather just skip NEX and wait for a Nikon F-mount mirrorless so I can continue using my existing Nikon glass. Especially since NEX lens selection sucks and will continue to suck for quite a while. (Note that many of the rabid NEX fans use legacy glass via adapter, not the pitiful selection of native E-mount lenses. And focus peaking is indeed sweet. However, Panasonic has already implemented focus peaking on its upcoming camcorders, and it is only a matter of time before software stuff like that filters down to the cameras as well, perhaps via a firmware update.)
Imho, Nikon 1 went a little too far in shrinking sensors, though, as there is not much depth of field control compared to FX, DX/APS-C, or even m43. m43 is the smallest I'd go if you want decent DoF control. Just imho. Nice PDAF though.
Facebook
Twitter