The question recently arose in another thread as to whether it was appropriate to discuss other makes of cameras and their advantages over Micro Four Thirds, on a Micro Four Thirds forum. This type of issue will always risk straying into dangerous territory, with the potential for some bitter and acrimonious exchanges. Also, it begs the question, is it relevant? Starting with the second question, “Is it relevant?” on first consideration the answer is “No!” People come on this forum because they use Micro Four Thirds equipment, or at least have an interest in it; they want to join in MFT related discussions, find out about new equipment, learn from more experienced users how to get the best from their cameras and see stunning pictures taken on MFT. However, upon thinking a little deeper maybe there are positive reasons to compare MFT to other formats. No system can evolve in isolation; to survive it must remain competitive to the alternatives. If better or more attractive options exist, to ignore them is like an ostrich burying its head in the sand (do they really do that?) I suppose the reasoning for such denial is that drawing attention to superiority that exists elsewhere might channel potential new MFT users in that direction and encourage existing users to migrate. I wonder why we develop such loyalty to our chosen brand? Surely a situation of falling market share would be an issue for Olympus or Panasonic to worry about? I can only guess that there is a fear that ownership of large amounts of gear might become a poor investment if the brand becomes uncompetitive, but surely trying to paper over the cracks of a system’s shortcomings is counter-productive? As things stand I do not see any reason for concern over either Olympus or Panasonic. Other manufacturers do some things better and alternative formats do have certain advantages, but the reverse is equally true. Sure, some of our contemporaries will chose to move on for reasons of individual preference, specific features not offered by Olympus or Panasonic that are available elsewhere, or simply because they wrongly assume that their mediocre pictures are the fault of their equipment and something perceived as “better” will offer an instant fix. However, brand migration is a two-way street and my impression is that at present there are rather more heading towards MFT than away from it. So regarding the original question, is the avocation of other systems and extolling their advantages on this forum appropriate, I say bring it on and let’s have a healthy, constructive and polite debate. I appreciate that for this to happen a level of maturity sadly lacking on many other forums would be required, but I think that here on Micro Four Thirds User we might just have the right mix of experience, tolerance, camaraderie, good humour and sensible moderation to make it possible. Prove me right!