Hi ZenitE

Oly make fine cameras and what it has done with 4/3rds is what it's been doing for decades. Making small cameras which follow in the tradition of miniature photography, a concept defined originally by the arrival of the Leica.

The famous Pen series of the 1960s is a classic example of a niche Oly has consistently dominated ever since. Today's E series cameras carry on in the miniature tradition. Oly engineers clearly understood that digital presented new challenges, but that the long held desire by a significant part of the market would be just as strong for easy to carry and use, high quality cameras capable of delivering high quality images.

The Pen series of the 60s used a format half the size of 35mm frame, but were quickly appreciated by those who realised they could still turn out professional quality images from a camera which could be stuffed in a pocket and carried everywhere. People still go dewy-eyed talking about their Oly Pens. Oly did it again with the OM series, making a smaller, full frame 35mm SLR than had ever been seen before. People still go dewy-eyed talking about those too.

Then Oly launched the E series in 2003. Although a lot of digital technology meant bigger bodies, Oly succeeded in miniaturising digital SLR photography in just the same way it had with half-frame and 35mm. Driving down size and weight; utilising smaller formats; it's what Oly does best.

What some seem to have difficulty appreciating about 4/3rds, is that it has delivered publishable, high-quality miniature photography by using a smaller sensor. Yes, larger format sensors mean larger images are possible, but 4/3rds delivers publishable quality which is large enough, while offering all the great benefits of a smaller format. People who use and understand 4/3rds don't need any more. Even Canon have given a nod to the high-quality small format argument by bringing out their G9 fully controllable compact which many serious Canon folk now carry around with them everywhere. But although certainly a fine camera, it's still not a true, miniaturised, interchangeable-lens DSLR with the quality and versatllity which go hand in hand with such.

IMO, Olympus have done it again and more and more people seem to be discovering this for themselves.

On the macro article, I commented in another thread that I understand 4/3rds has enabled Olympus to cost effectively utilise superior concave front elements in some of its lenses including the ZD 50mm f2 macro. I use this lens myself and I must say, it is a star performer.

Finally, I too have an E-500 and I find it to be a wonderful camera. Coming from much larger Canon gear, it has been a revelation to me how liberating 4/3rds photography is. Image quality has never been an issue whatsoever in print or projected images, even in company among larger format brands. In theory, I'm sure someone could devise a demonstration to show a difference, but it would be largely irrelevant because in reality, in the way my images are used, it has never been an issue - not once.