Hello All, I have a question regarding the OM-D and how I shoot. First a little background. I have been into photography for over 30 years. Over the years my area of interest has come down to only pet photography. I do some paid work on occasion but primarily shoot for rescues and shelters to help animals get adopted. The economy in my area is absolutely terrible and I was out of work for over 18 months. During that time I sold all my camera gear to pay the mortgage. Now that I am back on my feet I am looking to rebuild my kit. When I am shooting 95% of the time it is one handed because I am using my other hand to get the animals attention and guide their eyes to me. I have always shot in continuous focusing mode. I keep my focus point on an eye and wait for the animal to get were I want it, then I make some sort of noise to catch the animals attention. I will usually only have a spit second to get the shot while the animal stops and looks, then they go back to doing their own thing. The animals tend to move sporadically and in unpredictable directions so using continuous focus to track them until the right moment is the only way I have found to guarantee I get usable shots. This style is not very demanding for cameras like my previous D700 and D7000. But they are heavy when shooting one handed for hours at a time. Plus the added DoF at wider apertures is a bonus since I have had times where shooting at f/2 and wider is needed because of the light available, but shooting this wide ruins as many shots as it gets. So my question is, and my major sticking point with going to the OM-D, is the AF up to the challenge of how I shoot? I can create a very long list of things that are benefits to what I shoot by switching to the OM-D, but the AF performance trumps them all if it will not perform as I need it to. Any input any of you may have is greatly appreciated.