As to looking better: I am wondering now if this shows that a well posed and lit marketing still can make the subject look more desirable than a few frame grabs from a journalist's video!?
Maybe. But I think they messed up in marketing. A lot of people warmed to the omd 5 because it was pretty and retro and the video that was linked was a bad mock up.
Freaked people out.
I think these size cameras have a place. Actually I don't understand why full frame 35mm cameras are so large considering how small the ovf is.
Olympus needs to sell cameras in a cell phone world and they have to make up there mind what they're selling. If it's professional, it needs fast lenses, sound in and out, (whether you like video or not), clean iso to 1500 or so.
The GH3 is a mini 5d clone, but is capable. Really capable and works right out of the bag.
But all makers gotta stop messing around with this 2 year and out upgrade stuff.
I'll buy the new omd right now and their new lenses some of they're older 43s, if they hit the mark, have sound in and out, a real adjustable video file, actually all the usability of the gh3, but if they only have part, then panasonic gets my money.
Oh yea, and Olympus needs someone from the planet earth to write their menu system.
I think there is a great place for these 4/3 cameras. They may look small next to the cameras from Canon and Nikon, but put them next to a 35mm film camera and they're about the same size.
I'm sure even on the high end the hesitation to buy the newest is felt.
With RED. I have two R1's, bought a Scarlet, ordered but cancelled the Epic because I used the R1's all the time, the Scarlet sets in the case for numerous reasons.
Same with these 4:3's. They could offer a 3k or 4k video file to outdo black magic, charge another grand or so, offers upgrade services (like RED which is very smart) and keep a lot of people in the fold for a long time.
But trying to sell anything because they held basic features back and will offer them later, just isn't a positive way to sell.