What is it with M4/3rds folks? They like their camera and lenses, and are probably a bit annoyed at the internet influencers who for the past 2 or 3 years have been bashing the system - and perhaps - helped lead to the downfall of Olympus.
Personally, I have most recently owned both M4/3rds (Olympus e-m1 II) and FF (Canon R). I use the Olympus system far more often due to the size and weight advantage. Not to mention that for less money, the Olympus is a pro level body with 2 card slots, better weather sealing, and has features like hand held in-camera focus stacking that I use and don't have with the R. Although I have sold some of these lenses of late, my systems were:
Olympus e-m1 II: 574g, wide angle lens: 9-18mm 155g, 2" long, standard zoom: 12-45mm pro 254g, 2.7", all-in-one zoom 12-100mm pro 561g, 4.6", tele zoom 75-300mm 423g, 4.6". Total weight: 1,967g. Total lens length: 13.9"
Canon R: 660g, wide angle EF 16-35mm L 615g, 4.4", standard RF 24-105mm L 700g, 4.2", all-in-one zoom RF 24-240mm 750g, 4.8", tele zoom EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 II 710 g, 5.7". Total weight 3,435g. Total lens length: 19.1".
While the lenses are of course, not exact equivalents, both systems have 2 pro level lenses and 2 consumer lenses. There is a huge weight and size advantage to the m4/3rds system that I think is quite evident. And as I mentioned on amother thread, the wider DOF can also be advantageous, depending on what you shoot. I shoot a lot of flower pics where I need an aperture of f/13 or so to get the entire flower, or a few flowers in focus suing my M4/3rds lenses. I can not get the same pic with my FF Canon.