QUOTE (Dale Cotton @ Aug 5 2008, 07:31 AM)
1. Phil Askey's comments and the mention of LiveView both point to an EVF instead of an optical range finder. The inherent parallax problem and longer focal length limitations of the range finder design probably rule it out. But do you really want to live with EVF? From what I've read both speed and resolution would have to be much improved just to become tolerable ... and it still wouldn't be your grandpa's M3.
Optical finders in most compacts are WYGIWYG. At least an EVF would be WYSIWYG.
QUOTE
2. Some combination of the smaller pixel pitch inherent in 4/3 and the historically noisy Panasonic Live MOS sensor technology have always eaten into DR/ISO.
ISO 1600 on an E3 is still better than your typical compact at base.
QUOTE
3. Olympus and Panasonic would have to make large strides in the AF department to meet expectations based on Canon and Nikon dSLRs.
A. I doubt it applies as the AF type will likely be a lot different.
B. They have. Try an E3 with a 12-60 lens.
QUOTE
4. Micro 4/3 implementations will be measured against the current state of dSLRs in IQ and usability by pros and prosumers, and against the current state of compacts in pocketability and ease of use by general consumers.
Okay.
QUOTE
Of course we'll just have to wait to see what the first implementations actually look like, but if any of you are more optimistic I'd love to hear your counter arguments.
It is all guesswork right now.