In the Four Thirds, later Micro Four Thirds, world, Olympus and Panasonic played out some of the familiar tropes between these two corporations -- except they (Oly & Pana) had already agreed on the sensor size and lens mount electronics... so it was much less risky or painful to commit to one over the other.
In general terms, Panasonic had the better motion video features, Olympus had the better stills, but it was / is pretty fuzzy, and a closely matched feature set.
One of my top five favourite blog posts ever is an impassioned rant [1] about digital Full Frame sensors, originally published in 2008 before they became generally affordable (but while they were still very much a fantasy for many photographers who didn't really understand why they wanted one). Updated over the years, and still worth the read.
As someone entering the field without a large collection of (by contemporary standards) poorly designed, overweight, ill-suited lenses -- it was a less complex decision to identify the path that most closely resembled an open standard.
[1] http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/FullFrameWars.html
In general terms, Panasonic had the better motion video features, Olympus had the better stills, but it was / is pretty fuzzy, and a closely matched feature set.
One of my top five favourite blog posts ever is an impassioned rant [1] about digital Full Frame sensors, originally published in 2008 before they became generally affordable (but while they were still very much a fantasy for many photographers who didn't really understand why they wanted one). Updated over the years, and still worth the read.
As someone entering the field without a large collection of (by contemporary standards) poorly designed, overweight, ill-suited lenses -- it was a less complex decision to identify the path that most closely resembled an open standard.
[1] http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/FullFrameWars.html