There isn't even a production m43 model out that really demonstrates how small they can be. I don't think the G1 counts. If Olympus comes out with a camera the size of the prototype then I would much prefer it to something like the Canon G10. Let's face it, even using RAW the its high ISO output really isn't very good. Same goes for the LX-3. And I think the benefit of having interchangeable lenses is missed. If i'm going to be using it as a pocket camera I will most likely not carry around extra lenses. I'll choose a lens that will best fit the situation I plan on being in. If you go fixed a la Sigma DP1 you don't have that option. And making it fixed lens zoom? Well we'll soon see if it's even possible, while keeping size in the G10 realm.

I haven't read all comments but generally is about compact camera with big sensor, then how small can a zoom lens be on big sensor.. etc..
Why not having a smaller sensor but low pixels.. say 6MP??? then u might have small lens, compact with low noise (similar to having big sensor)... then call this a micro DLSR..

I just scanned this forum and didn't find anyone mentioning a really important point when it comes to the size of cameras. Cameras are getting smaller but our hands are not evolving fast enough to keep up. I've been a professional television cameraman for 25 years and there is no doubt that serious professional cameras of all sorts will always remain large enough for fine manual control. Are artists demanding that the paint brush industry miniaturize and include more hairs per square inch?

This is a fascinating discussion with many well-considered viewpoints, but what it says to me is that I should keep my money in my wallet and wait a while before I buy a serious compact camera, because evidently there still is no such thing on the market. I have been excited to get a new high-quality digital compact to put in my pocket, however, the compromises - from any manufacturer - remain too great. For a year now I have read many dozens of reviews and opinions of every flavor of small digital camera on offer, but they continue to come up short. The pocketable digital I use now provides 'snapshot' quality, and that imposes a certain mindset toward the images, which is limiting. I’d prefer to break away from that constraint, but I question if is it possible with the available crop of compact cameras.

If a person is going to produce quality images (and I don’t just mean on a technical level, but on a conceptual and aesthetic one, as well) then the camera has to be up to the job and not get in the way. Of course it is possible to make wonderful photos with a cardboard shoebox that has a pinhole in one end of it, nevertheless, at this point I prefer computerized convenience, but not at the expense of compromising my intent.

Okay, I’m being a hard critic. You make your choices and do your thing and if a shoebox can work, so can the current cameras. It’s too bad, though, to have to accept something that’s “all right, but . . .”

My ideas require a really little camera now, but some of my most successful photographs were done (years ago) with a Deardorff 8”x10” camera that occupied two large and heavy suitcases with all of its components, not including a very robust tripod. I hauled that gear on several 200+ mile canoe trips through the Canadian wilderness and enjoyed every minute of it, however, times change and my objectives have, too. Heavy encumbrances don’t suit my needs now, and that includes any sort of bulky camera, including DSLR’s. You readers all know that I am part of a growing market, but the manufacturers have decisively not yet caught up with that market.

I applaud the energy and consideration that all your comments represent. Without enthusiastic websites like Serious Compacts (that camera manufacturers no doubt pay attention to), mass market camera offerings would certainly fall short. There will always be compromises, but right now we need a great leap forward.

A personal review of the current top end compacts:
G10: to big and expensive with a ridiculously small zoom control lever.
P6000: under specked GPS, battery has to be charged in the camera and poor optical viewfinder. Shame as it's almost what I want in a small camera.
LX3: Great lens but shame about the lens cap on a string and no optical viewfinder.

You can guess what I would like to see:
G10 viewfinder on a P6000 with the LX3 lens!