. . . I just recently upgraded to M43 from my (still enjoyed) compact point and shoot digital cameras. A local shop had the Lumix GF3 with 14mm 2.5 kit for $199 (no tax!) and I couldn't resist. I come from a film background (35mm/MF/4X5) but making film relevant and easy to use, manipulate and print in this age is getting challenging. I had to give up my darkroom on my last move and even having my Fujichrome Velvia processed requires shipping. I can still develop B/W film. My raison d'etre for image quality had always been the large print to add to my portfolio case or hang on a wall. Digital really won me over when I took an image scanned from a 4X5 B/W negative and manipulated it in Photoshop. Even with my limited PS skills, I could enhance the image (and fix flaws) far better and faster than I could in the darkroom. I sent the file to Cone Editions and had them print a 20 X 24 print from it. It was expensive but life is short - and the final product was stunning. The neg had some major defects I could never have done that in the darkroom! So as making those prints has become more and more difficult, I've been sharing travel pics from my compact digital cameras informally online and figuring out how to save up enough for a Nikon D800 that I can use my existing Nikkor lenses with. Until then, M43 looks like a good option to hold me over. I really like the advanced capabilities of my new camera . . . with the RAW, auto bracketing etc., I look forward to learning the ropes. My first question would be: Why doesn't someone make an inexpensive M43 lens wider than 14mm? My favorite lenses in the film formats would correspond to 12mm in M43. This has always been a popular field of perspective. My camera kit came with a fast 14mm lens and the kit was only $199. And the least expensive 12mm prime is like $600-800? And there are only 1 or 2 models available? It seems strange.