As I wait for my E-M1 to be delivered, I've come to the realization that I'm essentially spending around $800 ($1400 minus whatever resale my E-M5 has) for the ability to autofocus well with two 4/3 lenses - the Olympus 12-60/2.8-4.0 SWD and 50-200/2.8-3.5 (non-SWD). Of course, the E-M1 has other advantages, but none of those are pressing enough that I'd otherwise be interested in upgrading. Indeed, to my eye, the E-M5 is actually a nicer package - smaller, lighter and I daresay prettier. Since the 12-60 is my primary walkaround lens, responsible for something like 75% of my images overall these days, the main issue is making it usable for subjects that aren't stationary and avoiding another premature AF motor death (and associated $170 price-tag). So it occurs to me that instead of exchanging for a new body, I might instead exchange for a new lens - the m.ZD 12-40/2.8. From what all the early reviewers says, the 12-40/2.8 is as sharp as any Olympus zoom in recent memory so presumably I wouldn't be losing anything in image quality. The 12-40 is also a lot smaller and lighter than the 12-60. Significantly, the net cost of the 12-40 would be around $500 for me ($1000 minus the proceeds of selling the 12-60). On the downside, I'd lose 40% of the telephoto range for my walkaround lens, and I'd still be out of luck when it comes to using my telephoto in anything other than MF mode. So, what do you folks think? Am I overthinking this, or is old camera + new lens perhaps the smarter way to go? Particularly interested in feedback from anybody with experience with 4/3 lenses and the E-M1 and/or E-M5.