As some of you will know I was an enthusiastic m4rds owner for many years.
I kept my GH-2 + 100-300 specifically to have a portable long zoom capability.
Alas a few months ago I suffered some kind of brain [email protected] because I stupidly sold both.
Now, I will admit the GH-2 had limitations. Above iso1600 for bird photography it was poor.
If I am going to buy back the 100-300 (which goes for silly prices on e-pray) then I also need a body.
For purely stills photography - I have absolutely no interest in video - can anyone tell me if there is much difference in IQ between a GH-3 (heavily discounted on ebay) versus the GH-4 more expensive?
Just to anticipate some responses. I have no interest in an Olympus body - too small, imho.
Thanks in advance for any responses.