After having rented the camera for a week and used it in a variety of situations alongside my Lumix GX7 and Canon 7D, I had hoped that I would be better informed about whether the Fuji makes sense for me or not. I'm certainly better informed but I'm no closer to deciding, unfortunately. If I were to compare the GX7 to the X-T1 I would say that the X-T1 wins hands down on the viewfinder, high frame rate, and noise control (at all ISOs, not just high ones). But the touchscreen of the GX7, the menus, and the lightness of the kit are all things that IMO the GX7 does much better than the X-T1. The autofocus I'd almost call a draw because there were times I was shooting low-light and the X-T1 couldn't respond fast enough for me. I felt like I was almost back in the olden days of earlier digicam autofocus. I don't even think about the autofocus in my 7D. I just point the little red square where I want and push the button. It Just Works. The GX7 I found to be better overall at autofocus (it's both accurate and fast) and sometimes it was clearly faster than the X-T1. But I can't give up the Canon RAW files. They're just fantastic when paired with a great lens like the 85mm f1.8 (a steal of a deal because it's not "L"): Just a little VSCO preset + vignette in LR and it makes it look easy. The GX7 is no slouch in the IQ department. At base ISO with a couple Yongnuo 560 III flashes on wireless remote and I don't even have to do much in LR but tweak down the highlights just a smidge and add a taste of clarity: But then the X-T1 was a great performer as well when it's tethered to the iPad and I have it hoisted up on a monopod: So you can see my dilemma. I would eat up the high ISO performance of a 5D III if I could justify the expense of the camera and the lenses you need to make use of it. For my portable makeshift style studio work, I can't imagine you'd get better quality short of medium format (a Mamiya RB67 paired with Ilford FP4+ makes for fantastic images BTW). The GX7 is a pleasing little camera but the noise is apparent to me even at low ISOs and with plenty of light. But then again, portability makes a LOT of difference to me. I can't afford to be lugging around multiple bags of equipment since I don't have a studio but work exclusively on location so I'm already dragging around lights, stands, backdrops, etc... The X-T1 was really a joy to use in the ISO department because the APS-C sensor did great work without needing much help in the noise reduction department. I'm going to be selling my Canon 17-40/4 L that I've really enjoyed using but just find too restrictive because it's wider than I really need. I need to decide whether to stick with the Canon APS-C (a known quantity for me and something I'm certain I can get good images from) and add the 24-105/4 L or use that money to go toward an X-T1 or E-M1. The E-M1 has clear advantages in that I can use 4/3 glass (the 50-200 SWD appeals to me particularly) and maybe also get rid of the very heavy Sigma 50-150/2.8. The 4/3 12-60 also appeals to me over the native m4/3 12-40 just for the extra reach. The Leica 25/1.4 is also a favorite on the GX7 so I could imagine using that heavily on an E-M1 (though I have to say I find the rendering sometimes very "clinical" and maybe too sharp; a little astigmatism isn't always a bad thing). Is the problem there's just so many good cameras and lenses any more that it really is impossible to choose The Format To Rule All Formats? I keep thinking: maybe I should rely more on my RB and just let the 6x7 negatives do their job even though its more work for me. But the viewfinder in the X-T1 is so beautiful! And the knobs and dials are so easy to use! Arg!