Assuming a rational market (see below for disclaimer!), the E-series could do well, at least in the consumer SLR market to start with, so long as the price/quality looks good relative to the options just above and below it, so let me try to estimate pricing.

I would expect  that a high end consumer level E-series body (maybe not the magnesium clad first offering) should be possible at several hundred less than the Canon 10D due to smaller sensor cost, so say $1300, and the standard lens should be no more than $250 (Canon 28-105 price), so a total negligibly more than I currently see for the E-20N, and with the appearance at least of being a far better camera for the moderately serious amateur.

But might not such customers then make the next step up to a "half-frame" DSLR with Canon, Nikon or Pentax lens compatability?

Right now, the price and convenience gap is big enough to stop many amateurs from taking that next step, largely due to the need to buy and carry a second relatively expensive ultra-wide zoom in order to get only moderate wide angle coverage, and really big money to get a lens with ultra-wide zoom coverage like the Nikon 12-24mm. (Down in the consumer camera world, $1200 is way to much for a lens, especially when it is so specialized.)


Things will get better soon for half-frame in the consumer DSLR market if the rumor is true of a second Nikon DX lens that is about 18-70mm, giving the FOV of 28-105 in 35mm format. Such a wide ranging zoom will probably also have a little mentioned side benefit: it could be somewhat useful with 35mm format too, because vignetting apparently only occurs when you exceed the angular FOV limit, which is 28mm for 35mm. So the lens would still work as a 28-70mm on a 35mm body. That would be useful at least for those who want to carry both film and digital SLR bodies for the time being.


About assuming a "rational market" though: a major threat to 4/3 format is the "SUV fallacy" of buying into far more capacity than you are ever likely to need, whether it be wanting 11MP and up even though you will never go beyond 8"x10" or standard inkjet size prints, or wanting access to a range of seventy lenses even if in fact the initial Olympus E-series line of four lenses already covers what 99% of consumer SLR users ever buy, and adding a wider zoom would make it about 99.9%.

Yes, speaking as someone who is generally satisfied with my current "sub-professional grade" photographic equipment, I have often thought that I would be fairly happy with a fixed zoom lens camera if it had a very good array of supplementary lenses and a good TTL viewfinder (be it optical or electronic), and the idea of keeping dust at a distance also appeals a lot to me.

I have a dream of a lens system designed from the start with each lens having two components: a back component for all focus, zoom and aperture operation, always used with one of a range of interchangeable front components consisting of a fixed lens group that simply adjusts the overall magnification and hence field of view. The back component could be permanently attached, or might be interchangeable to allow for upgrades, but usually left on the body. (Filters would be mounted between the two components.)


So far though, I am very frustrated by the viewfinders on most fixed lens cameras, which makes me want an optical SLR until EVF's get significantly better, and I am also rather frustrated by the current wide options with sup's; and sadly, I suffer a bit of that "SUV fallacy", in that if I am to pay US$1500 plus for a camera system, I would prefer it to cover the possibility that I will someday want an exotic capability not handled by sup's, like a fast portrait lens or a macro lens with flat focus field at short distances. Like people who demand bulky tower system computers with numerous expansion slots and extra disk bays even though they almost certainly will not use them.

I agree with you BJL. We live in affluent societies, no matter how much we complain about the cost of things, and photographers love to buy more than they need.

Most people I know who own entry-level SLR's never buy another lens, so a ZLR would be perfect for them, assuming that a p&s is too limiting in the first place.

I use an old manual focus system and I shoot photos for fun so don't care much about pro-level system expandability. It drives me crazy to read the advice newbies get on "photo.net" and other places when they're told to buy into a system into which they can grow. There's 7 billion people on earth and I find it hard to believe that humans can't support more than 2 SLR camera brands. Are we just naturally conformists or more susceptible to marketing than I hoped?

Having said that, the Olympus 4/3's body on display at PMA is still too big for my taste. Electronics is supposed to miniturize things. But I like the idea of a standardized mount. From what I have read, I can't tell how much of the functionality is standardized though. Presumably, some features will be possible with some body/lens combos and others won't and this will extend across brands. There will be hundreds of on-line threads discussing those nuances.

I think Michael is a bit premature in writing off the format (in his PMA review). Even if no other brands decide to adopt it, Olympus needs to have a proper dslr to offer. At least having killed off the OM range before getting involved in Autofocus, they can design with a clean slate rather than having the carry over of 35mm lenses. As Canon and Michael have demonstrated, full frame 35mm sensors have the ability to produce results which were only achievable by medium format. But at a price. If 4/3 can equal or surpass 35mm then there is a place for it especially if Canon's new D10 can be undercut. Particularly in UK where goods seem to have the dollar price converted directly to pounds a 1.6 factor rip off!!!!

As the E20 seems about to disappear Olympus appears serious about launching in the summer. As a potential buyer (not being locked into a system with my obsolete manual SLR) I hope that the arrival of 4/3 is not followed by too many instant upgrades like Canon D30, D60 ,D10. Hopefully the launch spec will be set at a level that will save me having to trade up too soon. The delay in launching may not have been so bad if Olympus are able to enter the market with a more mature product.
Tony Collins
Exeter
UK

The consumer market may be happy with the current E20 solution to wideangle, a screw on front w/a converter. Come to think of it teleconverter screw ons have the advantage of fewer main lens removal with reduced ingress of dust. As Olympus are currently dicounting E20s with a free w/a converter I will hope for a lower price than the one you mention,(I'm a master of self delusion) also that Tamron and Sigma are tooling up to make lenses for the new open standard mount.

P. S. On "market irrationality", I am thinking of the example that in the low end consumer SLR market, many people buy an SLR body with one zoom lens and never go beyond, so the Olympus ZLR idea of saving costs by having an integral wide ranging zoom lens is a "rational" product choice, but most people prefer paying a bit more, probably for the possibility of later upgrading the lens selection.