Some days I try to imagine myself as an Olympus die hard, but I look around the room and notice the Canon cameras I have also enjoyed. I was briefly tempted to try the Nikon D5100 but shied away because I didn't much like the DX lens offering. No way. The truth is, Olympus has managed to create a variety of answers to relevant questions that I have begun to find compelling. It is a bit of a shame that Olympus lost its place in the DSLR market because of the contractual obligation to buy sub-par sensors from Panasonic. The E-620, for example, would have been a smash hit if blessed with the Sony-sourced E-M5 sensor. The whole DSLR thing is a now a credibility game, almost like Nikon and Canon are waving a wand in front of the captive choir to make sure all eyes are averted from innovation elsewhere. Just keep singing D-S-L-R forever. Sony is doing lots of interesting things. The latest rev of the RX-100 is amazing. Back to our main point, however, the best way to discern the contrast in board room motives is to look at the list of recently designed and produced lenses. When you eliminate all the lenses that can only function in the phase-detect AF mode and which lack any image stabilization pretense, it looks like Canon and Nikon have beds next to Sleeping Beauty. Yes. The castle is beautiful, but nobody is home. Truth is, you get he impression that APS-C is an afterthought for both companies because the lens catalogs are full of spectacular old lenses. Go read the lens specs. All the angles of view are rated for full frame, and no focal-length equivalences are provided to make it easy to think in APS-C terms, as if the ad copyists forgot. The funny thing is, most of the great old lenses, less full featured, cost twice as much as mZuiko or Lumix counterparts. I do think it is very interesting that Panasonic sees the light, now, on sensor-plane image stabilization. It is mechanically efficient, and cost effective over the long run to solve the problem once and for all. A program from Nikon or Canon to follow suit would instantly increase the relevance of the lens catalog by 50 percent, So much of what the duopoly chooses not to do, and what to do instead, seems stop-gap. Olympus has bent over backward to woo a modern camera buyer who needs a high-performance photographic instrument. I do think we need to keep full frame for a while. If you have large print sizr requirements for 24-megapixels and up, avoid APS-C. You are one of those lucky ones who can afford sharp lenses to match. None of the APS-C targeted lenses can resolve to 24-megapixels. It is almost as if the lack of lens sharpness makes it possible to eliminate anti-alias filters. At the end of the day, APS-C holds no advantage over FourThirds, sensor-wise, or as we have noted in particular reference to lens catalogs. In some ways, electronic view ports are better, even though not related to picture output quality. Yes, the OM-D line is compelling. The sad thing, as the games play out, is that Olympus may be too late to save. They need to sell more cameras! But they are disadvantaged by the monotony coming from Nikon and Canon. There is no argument that the duopoly's best stuff in full frame is anything less than awesome for the professional. For everyone else, a modern story is growing late.