I've been thinking about this now for a week or so and I (as well as doing a lot of looking at images and I have a few additional questions (well maybe more accurate to say I have a few assumptions I'd like to confirm). It looks like the screw mount Pentax Takumars are a nice match with the m43 cameras but I wonder do the K mount Pentax stack up well against them? From what I gather the Takumars have better build quality, are sharper and have terrific bokeh. The OM lenses do not seem to be that highly thought of. I have always thought they had terrific color rendition, were well built, and compact but I also was never entirely satisfied with them on my old E520. They could never produce something like the images I have seen from the Pentax 50/1.4 Takumar (like this one) or even something as sharp as the Konica 40/1.8 (swirly bokeh and all). FWIW I just picked up an OM to m43 adapter since I have 3 OM lenses but I don't plan on getting any more OM lenses. I am hoping to pick up another adapter so I'm trying to decide which one to get based on what lenses I want to use. I'm leaning toward screw mount as there are a LOT of lenses available but I also need to figure how likely it will be that I can afford the lenses. For instance I wouldn't pick up a Leica to m43 adapter (despite the fact that I'd love to use 40/s Summicron) because I simply can't afford the lenses. I guess what I am looking for in my own inarticulate way is which line of lenses gives me the best "bang for the buck". I've narrowed it down to Pentax K, M42, Minolta MD (because they seem to be cheap and plentiful) and Konica AR.