[6BQ5]

Just curious to know if there's anyone who has switched from the Q system to the u4/3 system? I'd like to know your thought process behind it. What drove you to do it? Was it the lenses? The larger sensor?

[Aegon]

I had µ43 before I used Q, tried Q, and kept µ43 after I sold my Q stuff.

Any modern µ43 body with an Olympus 45/1.8 pretty much my favorite photography kit in existence.

Extremely fast AF.
Extremely accurate AF.
Extremely good optical quality.
Very good control of DoF.
Very good low light performance.
Very small and lightweight.

Q is smaller and lighter. But Q files are very brittle in comparison to µ43 and low light performance of the Q isn't good enough. I found that there are many circumstances where the Q falls short of µ43 in everyday shooting, and very few circumstances where the Q is preferable.

When I owned both, I used the µ43 more often, and in the cases where I used the Q I often wished I had used µ43 instead.

On the whole µ43 lies at the sweet spot for photographic bliss, IMHO. Admittedly, my use case may not match yours. I pretty much want to take pictures of my kids. I also like prime lenses, and though the Q 01 Prime is good, there weren't good all-around portrait primes for Q.

[wombat2go]

I don't know why Pentax did not join M4/3, to follow the old film P110 system which is same sensor size.
Pentax had the technology of the small interchangeable lenses with the iris and shutter in the mount.

Two years ago I got an M43 body and machined some adaptors both for Pentax K and Pentax 110 lenses.
I made a fixed circular stop of about f/6 for the P110_18mm lens.
The "fence test" below of the old Pentax 110 1:2.8 18mm shows a fall off of sharpness on the edges.

We continue to use the M43 with that 18mm for family photos and baseball etc.
The camera stays in A mode and hyperfocal-ed so anybody can use it.
The lens artifacts-corner sharpness along with the circular stop- give quite pleasing portraits. (Last photo)