« on: June 19, 2014, 07:40:15 AM »
For your needs now, it depends upon what you want.
Are the current generation EVF's good enough for you, or will only OVF's do?
And then as for the size of the body and the lenses, yes, mirrorless are typically smaller. But once you get over the more extreme retrofocus lens design required on wide angle lenses to accommodate the mirror assembly, there really isn't much in it with like for like lenses.
If you want to have the best low light performance and/or a really shallow depth of field, there's only one way to get it - a lens with a huge entrance pupil. That means the glass will be equally big on either system - and something the size of an 85L on a tiny m43 body doesn't make much sense. There again, if you only have lenses the size the 40/2.8, a smaller body with an equivalent lens (if a 20/1.4 pancake existed) might make a lot more sense.
And as for which system will be around in the future and worth sinking your money into, look at sales of DSLR's vs mirrorless. DSLR's seem to be a lot more buoyant right now. And then also look at how some manufacturers are willing to drop mounts, leaving people with a load of expensive lenses and no new bodies. For example, Panasonic/Olympus with four thirds, Samsung with the K mount (although Pentax still use that), and Sony look set to drop the A mount. Yes, Canon did it back in '87, but they look set to stick with the EF mount long term.
Obviously it's your choice, but after a lot of careful deliberation I did what almost everyone else on this forum has done - invested my money into the Canon system.