Sans Mirror — mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras  

m4/3 is now four years old. In those four years, we've gotten 20 camera bodies from two companies and 32 lenses from five companies (even more lenses than that if you count a few minor iterations of the same lens). One common complaint I hear these days from people thinking about buying into the m4/3 system for the first time is that they're a bit confused with all the options. Let's see if I can clear the air a bit.

Talking About my Generations

The m4/3 bodies have gone through what I'd call three generations at this point. Loosely put, I'd categorize things this way:

Generation 1:

• Olympus E-P1, E-P2, E-PL1
• Panasonic G1, GH1, G10, GF1

Generation 2+:

• Olympus E-P3, E-PL2, E-PL3, E-PM1
• Panasonic G2, GH2, GF2, GF3, G3

Generation (3):

• Olympus E-M5 OM-D, E-PM2, E-PL5
• Panasonic G5, GF5, GX1, GH3

Generation (3+):

• Olympus E-P5, E-PL6
• Panasonic G6, GF6

Some of you will quibble about this categorization, but I believe it to be basically correct.  

This is one of the confusion points for newcomers, so let's make sure that everyone understands something: Olympus and Panasonic are still unloading excess generation 2 inventory on the market, meaning you'll find probably 11 or more camera choices as you shop (especially on the Internet). 

One clear indicator: 12mp is an "older generation", while 16mp+ is a "newer generation". 

Is it a bad thing to buy a generation behind? Not at all. From the very beginning, the m4/3 cameras were quite capable. I started shooting with an E-P1 in 2009 (see below) and have some very solid images taken with that camera in extreme conditions. But it's the age old story with consumer electronics: the status quo moves constantly. Over time we've gotten more pixels, better dynamic range, better handling of low light, better JPEG rendering (especially Panasonic), and more features. 

Olympus E-P1, kit lens, out of camera JPEG very slightly processed

Every now and then we see blow-out prices on a handful of "retiring" m4/3 cameras. By blow-out, I mean as little as US$199 for a body. Such prices are another thing that confuses newcomers. Should they buy these older low-cost bodies or the much more expensive latest-and-greatest? If you really think you might make m4/3 your long-term system, the answer doesn't matter. Even if you buy a low cost body to start, the lenses in m4/3 are the real draw, in my opinion. You'll be starting down the path of getting into the system, and doing so inexpensively if you buy an older body that is being discontinued. You'll then be able to get a better handle on what else you want from your m4/3 system body and choose from the current options better in the future. 

As far as the truly current models go (OM-D, E-P5, E-PL5/6, G6, GF6, GX1, GH3), they're all quite good, just in different ways. So we need to talk about a second distinguishing trait.

Body Shop

At the moment we have three basic body styles to choose from:

• Simplified compact (low on external controls, requires using the LCD for composition, but typically almost as small as compact camera bodies). The GF3, GF5, GF6, E-PM1, and E-PM2 all fall into this category. 
• Rangefinder compact (more sophisticated user control, typically offers an optional EVF for composition, designed a bit like a small rangefinder film body but with no actual viewfinder). The E-P1, E-P2, E-P3, E-P5, E-PL1, E-PL2, E-PL3, E-PL5/6, GF1, GF2, and G1x all fall into this category.
• Compact DLSR (built-in EVF instead of optical viewfinder, DSLR like controls and handling, more built-in features). The GH2, GH3, G3, G5, G6, and OM-D fall into this category (as did the G1, GH1, G10, and G2).

With the simplified compact you'd always be shooting at arms length (LCD used for composition), and you'd have to dip into menus or the touchscreen LCD to change most options while shooting. 

With the rangefinder compact you'd usually be shooting at arms length, but you could put an optional EVF on and use the camera at your eye, at the slight disadvantage of adding something that sticks up off the camera and adds expense. At least you have the option of two types of shooting, though not as conveniently as the compact DSLRs. Most cameras in this range have more user controls (dials, buttons, and the like) that are available to quickly re-configure settings without dipping into the menus. 

The compact DLSRs are just that: you typically shoot them just like a DSLR, and they have plenty of direct controls so you don't have to menu dip. You can also shoot them at arm's length (ala Live View on a DSLR) if you want, and most have tilting or positionable LCDs, too. 

As we go up in sophistication (simplified compact -> rangefinder compact -> compact DSLR) we also go up in price. Surprisingly, we don't tend to go up in image quality. For example, the E-PM2 (simplified compact), E-PL5 (rangefinder compact), and OM-D EM-5 (compact DSLR) are remarkably close in image quality because they all use the same base image sensor.

Who's On First?

Which brings us to the Olympus versus Panasonic choice. Once you figure out which generation and which type, you're then faced with choosing between two manufacturers. Simple answer? For a majority of folk, it probably doesn't make a difference. 

But there are differences that you should note and be aware of. 

• Panasonic. Uses image stabilization in lenses only; Olympus lenses on Panasonic bodies will not be stabilized. Panasonic is about a half generation ahead of Olympus in terms of iterating their bodies. Panasonic, at least at the top end, has paid a lot more attention to complex and subtle video issues than Olympus. In some parts of the world—the US being one of them—Panasonic doesn't have a very strong dealer presence, and often times new gear is harder to get in a timely fashion. 
• Olympus. Uses sensor-based stabilization; Panasonic lenses on Olympus bodies can be stabilized at the lens or the sensor. Olympus is now using sensors from other vendors than Panasonic (Sony sensor in the third generation), and there seems to be a small benefit in doing so (for stills). While Olympus cameras do video, overall video quality can be a bit lower than the equivalent Panasonic model, though this has narrowed with each generation. Olympus has a better dealer presence in the US than Panasonic, but not excessively so. 

I personally don't find any of the Olympus/Panasonic differences to be big enough to sway my choice more than my overall reaction to handling and using the camera while taking photographs. The Olympus menu system can look like a cluttered mess to newcomers, though it allows a high degree of customization of how the body works, for example. I happen to like customization and will tolerate complexity to get it, but not everyone has that same reaction. 

Looking through the Lens

Lenses are m4/3's strong point. We've not only got more lenses for the m4/3 system than any other mirrorless system, we have some exceptionally good choices. There really isn't a poor choice in the bunch (though there are some lenses that are just "good").  

One thing that's especially welcome is that we have a full range of primes and we have a full range of zooms, not just a couple of zooms with a prime or two. 

In the prime world, we have the equivalents of 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 40mm, 50mm, 60mm, 90mm, and 150mm. Four of those primes are exceptional (12mm, 45mm, and 75mm Olympus, 25mm Panasonic), but all are good. If you like primes, m4/3 has you covered, though the prices add up fast. These primes are all reasonably compact, too. I can fit two m4/3 bodies and all of the primes into a very small camera bag. 

Another place where m4/3 excels is in the "quality" zoom realm. We have 14-28mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm equivalents, which are all at pro DSLR levels. But even in the lower priced and specified zooms we have a lot of really good lenses and a wide variety of choice (that'll take you from 18mm to 600mm equivalent!). 

Thom's B&H Wish List of the Best m4/3 Lenses

Advice

My final advice is simple enough:

1. Choose a body style (simplified, rangefinder, DSLR)
2. Decide whether you want everything stabilized (choose Olympus) or you're less worried about having everything stabilized (choose either Olympus or Panasonic)
3. Decide whether you want to buy at the leading edge (current generation, latest-introduced bodies) or are willing to trade off a bit of performance and features for a lower price (earlier generation, or at least bodies introduced more than nine months ago). 

From those three things you've essentially narrowed your choices to one, two, and sometimes three bodies. You're on your own from there (though read my reviews); just add lenses and you're done.  

Thom's Favorites

As of the date at the bottom of this article, my clear favorite m4/3 body is the Olympus E-M5 OM-D. It's a deeply-featured camera body in traditional DSLR style, has an excellent 16mp sensor at its heart, yet is quite small and light. Indeed, a bit too small. Most OM-D users are using one or more parts of the optional vertical grip, or the RRS optional grip to beef up the hand-holding a bit. All three of the current Panasonic models have much going for them, to, and I tend to travel with an OM-D as my primary body, and a GX1 or GF6 as my secondary body.

If you're into video, you have two very interesting and high-quality choices: the Panasonic GH3, or the brand new Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera. 

In terms of lenses, my usual travel choices are the Olympus 12mm, 45mm, and 75mm primes, plus a quartet of Panasonic zooms (7-14mm, 12-35mm, 14-42mm X, and 100-300mm). Rarely do I need to supplement this kit, though I will if I know I'm going to encounter the need for something these lenses can't handle well, like macro.  

See also Thom's m4/3 Bag.

Sony introduced its first mirrorless cameras after m4/3, but not long after. The original NEX-3 and NEX-5 models appeared in Spring of 2010 and established what is now a fairly wide line of products. Indeed, Sony appears to be using the E-mount that was introduced with the NEX-3 and NEX-5 for a wide range of both still and video cameras.

Generational 411

In the still realm, we now have 3.5 generations of NEX models:

• First Generation: NEX-3, NEX-5
• Second Generation: NEX-3C, NEX-5N (5N added an external EVF option)
• Third Generation: NEX-F3, NEX-7 (7 added an internal EVF and more controls)
• Third-and-a-half Generation: NEX-3N, NEX-5R, NEX-6 (Normally these might be considered 3rd generation, but the addition of WiFi and/or PlayMemories Apps sets them apart as a distinct new breed)

We also have a plethora of video cameras with the E-mount and NEX-derived sensors: VG10, VG20, VG-30, VG900, EA50U, FS100, and FS700. These range from camcorder like models (VG series) to destined-for-Hollywood models (FS700), with some other video cameras in the middle. Personally, I approve of this kind of bifurcation, but only if the still cameras continue to emphasize still features and ergonomics (with video on demand) and the video cameras emphasize video features and ergonomics (with stills on demand). So far, so good.

As with most systems, higher numbers indicate more capability. We have 3, 5, 6, and 7 in the model lineup now, and obviously the NEX-3N (and its predecessors) are the low end aimed more at casual and entry level users, with the NEX-7 (and its eventual successors) aimed at the serous enthusiast. The 5 and 6 models bridge the gap.

The NEX Uniqueness

From the beginning, the big draw to the NEX series has been the use of Sony EXMOR APS sensors (Super35 sensors for many of the video models). All else equal, a bigger sensor does have some benefits in low light and in providing shallow depth of field. The downside is that a bigger sensor tends to need bigger lenses, too. 

Which brings up one of the cognitive dissonances in the NEX design: the camera bodies are exceedingly small, often smaller than m4/3 cameras with smaller sensors. Yet the lenses are DLSR sized for the most part. Those that remember the old Sony R1 remember the "all lens with a handle" design very well, and the NEX models certainly echo that. This tends to lead to a left-hand-under-lens, right-hand on the grip shooting style, which isn't a bad idea (done right you'll stabilize the camera/lens). But not everyone likes that. Indeed, those seeking out mirrorless cameras because they're small and light tends to balk at the lens sizes with NEX. 

The other aspect of the NEX world that was off-putting to some was Sony's change in camera controls (UI). On the very original firmware for the NEX-3 and NEX-5, every control pretty much centered around three buttons and one dial, and these were definitely not optimally configured. Firmware updates gave users customization options that pretty much ended the complaints, and subsequent models have improved on it. Indeed, the NEX-5R, NEX-6, and NEX-7 all have plenty of direct user control and configuration, and while it is more "modern" than "traditional," I don't find any real problems with Sony's design. Indeed, I applaud them for not just giving us the same old, same old, but actually trying to put together something that's a little better for those willing to invest some learning time into it. It does take some study on how to configure a NEX model to best suit your tastes, though. 

One long highlight of the NEX line has been sensors. These days we've got state-of-the-art 16mp and 24mp APS sensors in the NEX cameras, and they perform remarkably well in low light and are capable of very good resolution. These are essentially the same sensors as in Sony's DSLRs (and in some Nikon and Pentax DSLRs). There's little to complain about in the EXMOR sensors, with perhaps the one drawback on them being that they do tend to overheat in constant video or Live View use, especially in really hot weather. But that's a manageable problem for most. 

My big complaint—and it should be every NEX user's complaint—is the available lens set. Early on it was very tough slogging, with only the 16mm f/2.8 and the 18-55mm kit lens available. The kit lens is a kit lens: decent but not great. The 16mm, unfortunately, has a number of weaknesses (it's big plus is its small size). Slowly we've gotten more lenses, but a NEX user has nowhere near the choice an m4/3 user has right now, and the gap isn't closing very fast, though the addition of Zeiss optics has added some nice choices at the high end. Worse still, I believe there really are only four Sony lenses that come close to revealing the true performance of the 24mp NEX-7 (24mm Zeiss, 30mm macro, 35mm, and 50mm). That's pretty restrictive for a high-end performance camera.

All the zooms (with the exception of the recent 10-18mm f/4 and the collapsing 16-50mm) are fairly large, too, meaning that if you opt for an all-zoom kit, you're going to be dealing with one or two DSLR-sized lenses.

Don't Go App (pronounced aye-p)

The NEX-5R and NEX-6 feature what Sony calls PlayMemories Apps. The idea is sound, but it is completely unclear if the execution will live up to the expectations. It looks like a Sony-originated and controlled play pen so far, and Sony will need to do a lot more than they've shown to date in order to make this a reason to consider one NEX model over another.  The WiFi addition on the new cameras could be useful to some, however.

Advice

First and foremost, make sure you can live with the existing and known-to-be-coming lenses. If you can't, the NEX isn't the system for you.

Next, take some real time to learn the NEX user interface. Get a NEX user to show you how it really works in practice, and how you customize it to your needs. Ignore anyone who says it's terrible and gets in the way: they don't know what they're talking about. It is different, though. As I noted above, I call it "modern," and some people would rather have a more traditional control system. You need to figure out if that's you. Don't just give up because you don't understand it on first touch. I didn't think I'd like it at first, but with the firmware updates and a lot of field use, I've come to very much like what Sony's done. Not to say there still aren't some kinks that need some work, but the user controls work well if you take the time to master them, IMHO. 

Finally, you have to choose between at-arm's length (NEX-3 and NEX-5 models, though the 5R has and optional EVF you can add) or at-the-eye (NEX-6 and NEX-7 with their built in EVF). Personally, the sweet spot of the NEX lineup seems to be the NEX-6. It offers a built-in EVF for DSLR like shooting, but it's a lower-cost, 16mp camera compared to the top-of-the-line, 24mp NEX-7.

Thom's Experience

I've been shooting with NEX cameras from the beginning. I have a lot of behind-the-camera time on the NEX-5, NEX-6, and NEX-7, and I actually like them as still cameras. I even own a NEX-based FS100 for video. My problem has been and continues to be lenses. The NEX-7 deserves some pro-quality lenses. It has one from Sony (the 24mm Zeiss). But even the NEX-5R and NEX-6 really could use some better lenses, especially at the wide angle end. Samsung's 16mm f/2.5 for their NX (not to be confused with NEX ;~) system far outshines the Sony 16mm f/2.8, but is about the same size. So you can make excellent performing small lenses for the APS sensors, Sony just hasn't opted to do so. If 19mm or 30mm are to your liking, you can mitigate Sony's lack of small, top performing primes somewhat by opting for the Sigma NEX lenses: they're good, maybe very good, though not exceptional. They're still better performers than Sony's 16mm. Fortunately, Zeiss has two new high-end Touit lenses that perform very well, plus at least two other makers have announced similar plans. If you're patient, more lenses are coming, and not too far out. 

The bottom line on NEX is that the jury is still partly out because of the lens gaps. Sony has made some remarkable cameras. But we need more accessories and lenses to fully flesh out what they can do. Don't get me wrong, a NEX-3N with the kit lens takes very good images and is a fine starter mirrorless camera. It's the high-end enthusiasts that need more from Sony and haven't yet got everything they want. I think Sony's gotten the message, and we're likely to see them more aggressively fill out the lens line up in the coming years. I hope so. We need more options than a rush of camera bodies.

The Nikon 1 lineup has now reached a second generation with a wider range of lenses, so it's time to start covering the basics of the system together in a single article.

The first generation of the Nikon 1 was the J1 and V1, and I'd also include the short-lived J2 in this generation. These were the products that kicked off Nikon's use of the 1" sensor and CX lens mount, and also introduced interesting new features such as the Motion Snapshot. 

Strangely, while Nikon seemed to be super hyper about reducing parts and manufacturing complexity in the original generation of cameras, they were priced higher than many of Nikon's more complex DSLR models. At the original prices, these cameras didn't sell well, and the rough edges on the camera designs—particularly the not-really-a-mode-dial that always changed to a new setting if you looked at it cross-eyed—didn't help matters. Nikon didn't start moving significant numbers of Nikon 1 products until they did a massive discounting just prior to launching the second generation. 

The second generation consists of three models: 

• S1 — barebones entry level camera (10mp)
• J3 — entry level model (14mp)
• V2 — small DSLR-like mid-range model (14mp)

Many of the biggest problems with UI were fixed in this generation, and they all shoot like very sophisticated compact cameras. If you want an EVF, the V2 is your only choice. While the V2 is probably the ugliest Nikon 1 they've made, it does handle like a very (and I mean very) small DSLR. 

The Nikon 1 claim to fame in mirrorless is remarkably small quality lenses that focus at DSLR speeds in reasonable light. As of the date I'm writing this, no other mirrorless camera comes close to the continuous focus performance of the Nikon 1 models. A V2 with the 30-100mm is probably the smallest camera I know of that can do reasonable birds in flight work. Couple a V2 with the FT1 lens adapter and a Nikon F-mount lens with AF-S (the 70-300mm VR is my favorite), and you have a real workhorse wildlife camera in a very small package. 

The downside to the Nikon 1 models is the small sensor size: 1". As I note elsewhere on this site there's about a stop difference each time you step down in sensor size: FX (full frame) -> DX (APS) -> m4/3 -> 1". Thus, the Nikon 1 models are not low-light specialists. It's actually amazing how much quality they do produce at ISO 3200, but don't expect them to outshoot bigger sensor cameras in low light. 

Nikon still seems to be overcharging for the Nikon 1 cameras compared to what they're likely worth. You can buy a very good DSLR and lens for what you can get the V2 kit for. I expect that prices will eventually fall dramatically again with the second generation as they did for the first, so if you can wait, wait. 

For lenses, you're pretty much stuck with Nikkors. Fortunately, Nikon has slowly stepped to the plate and produced some marvelous lenses for these cameras. The 18.5mm f/1.8 is exceedingly good. Surprisingly, the 6.7-13mm and the 30-110mm are also extremely good lenses. The stunner to me, though, was the new 10-100mm super zoom (not the power zoom version), which may actually be better than the 10-30mm kit lens in that range and almost holds its own against the 30-100mm. I'd recommend one of the following kits:

• 6.7-13mm, 10-30mm, 18.5mm, 30-110mm
• 6.7-13mm 10-100mm, 18.5mm

Amazingly, that takes you from 18mm to approximately 300mm equivalent in two or three lenses that are very sharp and problem free, and, of course, small. The thing I find remarkable is how small I can pack a full V2 kit. I think all of my ex-girlfriend's had bigger purses. (Okay, that was a bit sexist, so sorry ladies; but for most of you it will give you a very good reference point.)

Personally, I like the Nikon 1 with a good lens on it better than almost any compact camera (though that's changing a bit with the introduction of large sensor compact cameras). Beyond that, the Nikon V2 can quickly morph into a portable wildlife shooter's pocket kit, and is probably the best very portable "long reach" option out there right now. (Why do I keep mentioning only the V2 in respect to wildlife? Because of the built-in EVF. You can't hand hold a camera in front of you with 810mm equivalent focal length very well. The extra bracing point of the face makes all the difference in the world to getting good steady shots, even with VR active.)

Don't discount the Nikon 1 line (though Nikon should ;~). It sacrifices a little (sensor size) to gain a lot (very small system size with a full lens set). If the prices were a little more reasonable (watch for sales), this system would be selling in far greater numbers than it is. When all is said and done, in most situations the Nikon 1 cameras and the excellent lenses take very good photos.