Hi everyone. Long time, no see. I'm in a bit of a predicament; you see, I'm planing on getting a few prime lenses for my bodies soon, but I'm not sure if I really need them. I'd just like to hear from you guys on what you all think is the better choice. One glass that's a definite on my list is the 45mm (you're all probably thinking, "He still doesn't have one?" so go ahead and laugh it up). Now, here are the glasses that I can't decide on which to get: Oly 60mm f/2.8 Macro - I shoot a bit of macro here and there using my 12-50mm kit that came with my E-M5, mostly close-ups of small items, flowers, bugs, etc. and get pretty close and sharp results, but is this 60mm worth the $400+ to replace the kit? Oly 75mm f/1.8 - sometimes, I shoot events in low-light areas and many of them have stages that I can't just get on that easily without guards booting me out, so this glass can be useful for its reach and light-gathering ability. It can also be very useful for portraits because at 150mm equivalent, compression on portraits would look nicer. Problem here is that I already own the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 for such situations and already have the 45mm on the list of must-buy for portraits. I know that even though the 75mm gets slightly more light and is a little longer, it costs an extravagant $800+ w/o a hood while my Sigma only cost a fraction of this and came with a hood. Oly 17mm f/1.8 - this is a nice, fast and sharp wide glass that I like for street, scenic and landscape stuff; the problem is that I already own the Panny 20mm f/1.7 and would probably be redundant if I were to buy this. Oly 12mm f/2 - even wider than the two above, but like the 75mm, the price tag also scares me, or at least makes me more conscious on whether I really need this or not. Panny 7-14mm f/4 - possibly the widest non-fish-eye, but I see few uses for it aside from landscape and video stuff, the latter I don't really do much of too. Sorry for the post length. Thanks!