[rparmar]

I have both. I use my E-P1 much more than my K-x.

Saying why might help me understand.

Given that a lens of the same light capturing ability has to be exactly the same size no matter what the system, shrinking the body doesn't effectively save much space. Unless one is willing to compromise on the optics, which apparently is what m4/3 shooters do. For limited applications like street shooting this might make sense. As a general-purpose tool, not so much.

Should I assume that all happy m4/3 users are street shooters?

[Pentaxor]

What do you mean? The sensor is in 4:3 format so it's wider than APS-C.

I'm confused why you say it's wider. could you explain it better?

[jct us101]

I'm confused why you say it's wider. could you explain it better?

The ratio is wider than 3:2.

And rparmar, I use it more because I like it more. It's smaller and more fun to use. I really can't explain it better than that.

[aleonx3]

The ratio is wider than 3:2.

And rparmar, I use it more because I like it more. It's smaller and more fun to use. I really can't explain it better than that.

@jct_us101, it is the opposite, if you look at the diagram provided by Jogiba in the earlier post of the GH2 sensor, 3/2 aspect ratio is certainly wider than 4/3 aspect ratio. The thing is that why not use a circular sensor so you can pick and choose whatever aspect ration in the image output. The thing is that as I said before, I am tired of checking the image to ensure that the head does not get chopped off when we submit the images for printing 4x6 (which is still the most popular).

[rparmar]

And rparmar, I use it more because I like it more. It's smaller and more fun to use. I really can't explain it better than that.

Fair enough! The intangibles are important as well.

[WJW]

Anyone else interested in it?

Yes. Enough so I ordered one recently and it arrived today.

I'm going to respond to various comments (without quoting) and give some quick first impressions. This is going to be a bit rambling by nature and since I'm tired enough I shouldn't be doing this......

I bought this camera because there are times I don't want the weight or bulk of a DSLR. I have (and use) a DS2 and a K10d and I'm not getting rid of either. Both have their place and I like my results. But there are times they just aren't what I want to carry. If I was only going to have one camera, I would choose either of the my Pentax bodies.

What the E-PL1 is replacing is my Fuji E-510. Comparing them side-by-side, the bodies are very close, with the Fuji being slightly smaller. The lens on the Oly does protrude so the actual cubic storage area would be about double. The Oly still fits in a very small bag or large pocket so it is a reasonable replacement. My hands are a bit above average so I always felt the Fuji was just barely too small to be comfortable. There are also times my eyes bother me and I have found using the LCD, rather than the finder, to be helpful.

The current M 4/3 zooms are slower lenses (f4-ish) but that is a compromise to keep the size down. Since more lens companies are joining the M4/3group and talking about producing lenses, someone will surely come out with faster zooms. I won't be buying them since it defeats the purpose of buying a small camera.

The GH2 is a very different camera but the most of the M 4/3 (including the Oly) have multiple aspect ratios available. The Oly has 16:9, 4:3, 3:2, and 6:6 (1:1). If I was thinking of replacing my Pentax DSLR with a M 4/3 I would consider the GH2. One disadvantage of the Panasonic line of M4/3 cameras (IMHO) is the In-lens vs. In-body stabilization.

The LCD on the E-PL2 is 3"/460K vs. 2.7/230K on the E-PL1. The entire screen is used for the menus, zoomed view of images, zoomed in manual focus mode, and if you are shooting in 3:2 aspect. I can live with small black bars in the 4:3 mode. I will be mostly shooting Large/Super Fine jpeg or RAW+Jpeg in the 4:3

The biggest drawback of the entire M4/3 design is the loss of DoF. Since I'm essentially replacing a P&S that had even greater DoF, this is actually a step up. The sensor is also about 8x larger (surface area) which can't hurt.

I plan on adding either the Oly 17mm or the Panny 20mm pancake for the times I don't want a zoom or want a really small lens. I'm hoping someone will bring out a fairly fast (1.8±1/2) in a long fifty equivalent (27/28mm) that is smaller than the standard zoom. Since for me this camera is primarily a daylight shooter or indoor close-range snaps, the built-in flash should be fine. I'll also add the VF-2 eventually for the very bright Texas summer days or when I want to look down into a finder.

So, The camera with the kit zoom, VF-2, extra battery, and pancake lens will be my most likely kit for the camera. This will all fit in a bag that takes up about the same space as my Sigma 24-60/2.8 when cased and will weigh in at about 1 pound/460g.

I think I might invest in a m42 to M4/3 adapter just for fun. Mounting my Vivitar S1 200/3 or 90/2.5 with tripod mounted 1:1 adapter could make for an interesting combination.

[nickthetasmaniac]

I'm definitely interested in it, but not for myself... I just purchased an E-PL2 with the 14-42 and 40-150 kit for my parents to use while travelling and sailing. I think the key with this camera and lens kit is to understand that it is not an enthusiast orientated system (at least not at the moment). Which means that for most of us on this forum, it's probably not going to be that exciting. But for someone who wants a simple and compact camera that can fit in a small bag or big pocket and offer genuinely top quality images, something like this is perfect. Sure the IQ probably won't be as good as a K-x or K-r at 100%, but really for the target audience does a 2% difference matter? Besides, if you shoot jpeg (and most people buying the E-PL2 probably will) I'd say the IQ would be as good if not better than most APS bodies...

For me I'm fascinated by the GH2. Panasonic has been coming out with some really interesting lenses over the last year or so and I think with 2-3 more (fast standard zoom, fast compact portrait and fast tele zoom) it's a system that I'd consider to replace my dSLR gear.

[unixrevolution]

I'm definitely interested in it, but not for myself... I just purchased an E-PL2 with the 14-42 and 40-150 kit for my parents to use while travelling and sailing. I think the key with this camera and lens kit is to understand that it is not an enthusiast orientated system (at least not at the moment). Which means that for most of us on this forum, it's probably not going to be that exciting. But for someone who wants a simple and compact camera that can fit in a small bag or big pocket and offer genuinely top quality images, something like this is perfect. Sure the IQ probably won't be as good as a K-x or K-r at 100%, but really for the target audience does a 2% difference matter? Besides, if you shoot jpeg (and most people buying the E-PL2 probably will) I'd say the IQ would be as good if not better than most APS bodies...

For me I'm fascinated by the GH2. Panasonic has been coming out with some really interesting lenses over the last year or so and I think with 2-3 more (fast standard zoom, fast compact portrait and fast tele zoom) it's a system that I'd consider to replace my dSLR gear.

I think assuming that an EVIL camera, especially one with a Zuiko lens, will not produce high quality images, is a little naive. Honestly, I've seen decent point and shoots produce some amazing images because they have excellent glass.

Sure, the Oly may not be an enthusiast camera, but it's not the image quality that interchangeable lenses offer (The uncompromising quality of a fully optimized, fixed prime lens like the Fujifilm X100 is where you get that), but the flexibility and versatility of interchangeable lenses on a camera with a smaller form factor than a big, clunky DSLR really appeals to a lot of people. Personally, I love big cameras, but I know a lot of people who consider any SLR way too big and heavy.

[nickthetasmaniac]

I think assuming that an EVIL camera, especially one with a Zuiko lens, will not produce high quality images, is a little naive. Honestly, I've seen decent point and shoots produce some amazing images because they have excellent glass.

My comment wasn't referring to EVIL cameras in general, just comparing the sensor's themselves, in which sense I think all reports indicate that the Pentax is slightly better than the Panasonic sensor (that Oly uses). Although as I mentioned, if you shoot jpeg this may not be the case

And I agree, with the Pens especially the real appeal lies in the flexibility and versatility of the form factor and interchangeable lenses, and this is why I've so far encouraged two people to purchase one.