So my go-to lens kit is the 20mm/1.7, 14-140 (first gen), and the 7.5mm/3.5 fisheye - it's what I'm taking to the Galapagos (leaving tomorrow!) - and from a general photographic point of view, there's almost nothing I can't do with them. There are times, however, when I wish I had something a little wider, smaller, lighter, and optically better than the 14-140, but still with some flexibility. I've considered the f2.8 normal zooms, or the 9-18mm, but inevitably I get sticker shock, and even f2.8 is really not fast enough to make a big difference in low light, so neither could replace primes in the situations where I am most inclined to use them. With the 7.5mm, I really don't need the 9mm end of the 9-18, either. Enter the 12-32mm. I was immediately intrigued when the GM1 appeared, and when reviews came out suggesting that it was the best kit lens yet, my curiosity was piqued further. Used prices on GM1 kits, and even lens-only kits, continue to fall, and now that they're in the $200 range, I'm starting to consider them. The big question mark, then, is whether the 12-32 actually represents a real quality upgrade in its focal range over something like the 14-140? Does anyone with experience have feedback on this? Obviously it goes a bit wider (and is much shorter), but if it's not going to be any better than the 14-140 where they overlap, it might be worth putting my pennies in a jar for a future mid-range lens (a la the 4/3s "HGs") or just continue keeping my eyes peeled for a 12-35/2.8 deal somewhere when pursuing optical excellence.