[thxbb12]

Frankly the table does not convinve me. For example, Pana 14mm and Fuji 18mm are not directly competable. One is pancake with F2.5, the other is a regular lens with F2. The same goes for the Oly 17mm vs Fuji 23mm:  a f1.8 lens with decent IQ vs a f1.4 lens with super IQ. I also think the Oly 45mm should be compared to the Fuji 60mm: same equiv. FL, similar equiv F.

 

Everyone will make slightly different comparisons as the line ups don't have the exact same focal lengths and apertures.

This was merely an attempt at comparing somewhat comparable lenses.

Feel free to compare other lenses too, but the general picture is that MFT allows for a smaller package overall.

 

I'd myself consider Fuji, but I'm holding back for 3 main reasons:

• No in-body stabilization I'm really against in-lens IS as makes lenses less reliable in the long term, it increases the risk of decentering defects, it makes the lens larger & heavier and it increases the cost.
  
• Poor AF compared to MFT.
  
• Poor QC and this is the killer for me.
  

Other than that I really love the Fuji lens line-up. It's the one that makes the most sense among all manufacturers IMO.

I also like Fuji's commitment to their users. They are the only company that actually listens to their customers and implements their wishes in new firmwares. Heck, they recently updated the X100 firmware to almost match the one in the X100S! It's really fantastic.  If I didn't have a whole set of MFT lenses and was starting fresh today, I'd probably go the Fuji route.