"Solid", "plasticky", etc.. to me these are very subjective terms.
I guess I'll have to wait to have an EPL-2 in my hands to see what you guys mean.
I still find it difficult to see how can it be so much better build quality.
I mean, to me Plastic does not equal = bad quality. As I think I said before, do you know how resistant ABS plastic can be?
Perhaps there is a psychological aspect of holding a cold metal body that makes it feel more solid.
Or is it the weight?
Maybe my standards are set lower because of my limited knowledge on photo cameras or my video camcorders background.
But to me build quality is more about the buttons and dials, or if the camera creaks, if a screw seems to be loose, or if the unions of different parts of the body are uneven, etc.
Basically, any indicator that the camera will hold with many hours of handling an use (abuse).
So to me the EPL1 seems like a very solid built camera.
As I said before I think It has a weak spot on the popup flash, which seems very delicate.
And maybe the painted icons on the buttons might fade away with time.
I won't go into the lens, because I can only compare it to my old school metal Pentax K mount primes, that are built like tanks (And weight as much).
Still, I find the kit lens to seem very well built, very light, and I don't forsee mechanical problems in the future.
Sidenote:
I rant about this subject always considering that we are living on a consumerist tech evolving age, in which a "long time" might be 5 years. I don't expect tech stuff to last much longer than that, and I accept it.
Bicycles, guitars, tools, etc.? those should last long enough to give to my kids or grandkids.
Stuff with microchips inside? 5 years is a good run.
I mean, we see people today using 30+ year old original PEN's.
I don't think we will see anyone using an EPL-1 or 2 (or any other Digital camera of this decade) in the year 2040, not even as a nostalgic activity.