Tough as a nail. It's here.

[LightSpeed666]

It is built.
After wanting a full frame for a while, I went the complete opposite direction.
Mirrorless - Duel quad core image processors - hand held 50 megapixel high resolution imaging -
80 megapixel imaging off a tripod - Super fast auto focus - 60 frames per second electronic, and 18 fps on the shutter, and a whole lot more. I'm ready for this. lol all I need is for my 2 lenses to arrive.

 

[tirediron]

Very cool - looking forward to seeing the results!

 

[Derrel]

Keep us updated.

 

[K9Kirk]

It looks like a mini tank, just needs a barrel but that's on the way. You should name it Sherman. GL with it.

 

[Derrel]

" eeee- mix." As some people affectionately call it.

 

[edsland]

Nice looking camera, hope your lenses come soon

 

[LightSpeed666]

Thanks fellas.
To me,,,,the camera is a work of art. When first I saw it, I was like, " I want that!"
Then when I found out some of the things it will do, like in camera focus stacking, ( I play around with macro) up to 999 shots.
Focus bracketing. High res shooting hand held. 60 frames per second? Who would not want to shoot at a dragon fly with that?
Yes the full frame will be better in low light but I rarely shoot in low light. I also use flash quite a bit. The problem occurs early morning and late evening for wildlife.
This is going to effect any camera. I looked at some images from this camera , and really the low light performance didn't look bad to me. But I won't know until I can use it and find out for myself.
One of the things I'm perplexed by is pixel density.
On a full frame camera, the sensor is roughly 4 times the size of a micro 4/3 sensor. The pixels will be larger on , say a 36-45 megapixel full frame sensor. It seems to me in order to acquire the same level of pixel density as 20 megapixel micro 4/3 sensor, you would need roughly 80 megapixels on a full frame sensor?
Though the larger pixels of the full frame are capable of capturing more light, the pixel density of the micro 4/3 sensor would be higher?
In other words, packing smaller pixels into a tighter space. Capturing more detail, sharpness and whatnot. To me this just stands to reason, that anytime you can pack more pixels into a tighter space there will be some imagery gains.
Would this mean, not as good in low light, but as good or better otherwise? I do not know just yet. It's something I've been thinking about.

And here is something else to think about.
The full frame sensor would need to have roughly 80 megapixels to have the same, or close to the same pixel density as the 20 megapixel micr0 4/3's sensor.
At this point, high ISO, low light performance become equal regardless of sensor size, as now the pixel density and size of the pixels are the same, or very close to the same.

As an example, the photo below was captured on a 1:2.3 , twelve megapixel image sensor. A very small sensor on my drone. This sensor is a faction the size of a micro 4/3 sensor.
I think the image quality is stunning for such a small. tiny sensor. But here again, the drone camera's pixel density is off the charts.