I know it's not a fair comparison but I'm curious if others that have the 45mm and/or the 75mm find that those are worth having in addition to a good zoom? I picked up a 14-54 from KEH and even though the AF isn't the fastest (it's at least comparable to the Fuji cameras!) I wonder if the reported "fast" AF of the 45 and/or 75 is so superior and the usefulness of the f1.8 outweighs the duplication of focal length? I plan on using the zoom when I need flexibility. I have taken to using my E-M1 at football games by keeping it in the ThinkTank and whipping it out for wider shots of player interactions and when the action comes near the sidelines. The 25mm is fantastic for some things since it's not too wide but still gives great close-ups. But I need a little bit more reach generally and I'm thinking either the 45/1.8 or the 75/1.8 will help cover the shorter focal lengths I need given I use a prime tele for the main action shots. I'm just worried that having either or both of those would be unecessary duplication given the zoom covers the 45. The 75 I consider to be in another class by itself and don't compare it to the zoom but if I stick with just the 75 will that be sufficient or is the 45 also necessary?