Originally posted by Scorpion Despite the fact that smaller cheaper cameras can take excellent images, I don't feel they are what photography is about. I have been using SLR cameras since 1966 (Zenith-E) and nothing can come close to the experience of seeing the optical image in a viewfinder. Obviously point and shoot cameras are more convenient from the size point of view, but give me a DSLR every time. My present from my wife this Christmas will be a K-5 II and 1.4 50mm DA lens.
We aren't (or at least, I wasn't) comparing DSLRs with "smaller cheaper cameras" or with "point and shoot cameras". My Olympus E-M5 is smaller but definitely not cheaper than my K-5 II. Actually, I seem to recall the E-M5 cost about twice as much. And of course, the E-M5 is most definitely not a point-and-shoot. It's a full-featured (some might say over-featured) system camera.
You can say that "nothing can come close to the experience of seeing the optical image in a viewfinder". Well, that's subjective. The viewfinder on the K-5 II is not as nice as the one on my old Ricoh XR-7, but they just don't make 'em like that any more. And, as I have noted before, I feel more confident shooting with the EVF on the E-M5. (And it's not state-of-the-art anymore, since the E-M1 has an improved EVF, as do newer cameras from Sony and Fujifilm.)
Another thing I like about the E-M5 is that it's highly responsive. Everything it does is fast: focusing, burst mode, writing to the card. Comparing it with the K-5 II is sort of like comparing a sports car with a SUV.