Well I am disappointed that sony is going over the top in spec and price for the NEX 7 while Nikon look like following Pentax into an early grave with limited, price point competing interchangeable lens cameras.
What do I like about mFT?
Same things I like about FT- size, entusiast spec in controls and menus, expandability
Then there is : expandability..in 2020....the range of bodies, the new choice
-ve? CDAF ?? the range of new cameras...will I miss out on IR laser range finding which will be PDAF quality if i buy the flavour of next week? or built in EVF?
Sensor quality gap: will it be worth it? I mean a d7000 for 'serious' thought out shots and a ZX1 for walk around shots capable of wowing or sligjhtly impressing people on Facebook?
PRICE of decent kit. The price per f stop has to come down!
Unfortunetly Nikon isn't going APSC or a crop onto their 16mpx chips set up to say 12. They are allegedly doing a small sensor and a slow mega zoom according to the rumour mill. Bummer . Panolyeiaca will feel no pressure to do anything more than the EPM 3 and maybe an entry level from panny.
mFT is an annoying premium market: you pay more for less: slower lenses by in large, and more per f stop under f3 than FT or sony for example. They use less materials, which is probably one reason they went FT rather than APSC or of course FF . Oly would have been well served with a manual FF based on OM lenses sans autofocus as a serious pro, top am' cam'. But they struggled to make margin out the top line from the OM2 apparently and made cheaper lenses after y2.
The japanese engineers have been at it since the 1950s: compete on size-miniaturise and use mechatronics to employ less labour per part and less materials too.
For me the cash on the lenses which flatter the body is just too difficult. I mean if they had a killer 12-40 f2-2.8 and a 40-150 f3.5-4 I would be happy to buy a complete system. Then I'd have the OPTION of the 45mm f1.8, not feel the necessity for faster glass.