Hello, I have just purchased my first micro 4/3 camera (OMD EM5) with the intent of transitioning from the bulkier Canon 60D. I've read numerous reviews and stories about the advantages of m4/3 and was anxious to get my hands on one. However, when taking the EM5 out for a test run, my excitement waned. Granted, I'm relatively new to photography and am not formerly trained on the ins and outs, but I shoot manually and in Raw. I'm hoping that it's just a matter of getting used to the format and/or that I'm doing something wrong, but was wondering if you all could offer some thoughts on my doubts... -My primary set up on the 60D was a 40mm prime lens, so I picked up the Lumix 20mm 1.7 lens (along with the kit lens) for my EM5. This was based on my expectation that the images would be the same given that the micro 20mm is equivalent to 40mm on a 35mm Camera, but the images are much wider and distant. Both are set to 3:2 aspect ratio. I assume this because the 60D is not a 35mm. What would be the best lens to mimic a 35mm or 40mm DSLR? Or am I completely missing the point on this? -My main focus is shooting street photos, often covert, so AF is important to me to capture spur of the moment images or just generally good images when shooting from the hip, so I was pleased to read that the EM5 had "lightning fast" focusing. But, I've found that the AF lags a bit compared to the 60D set up I had, and if I'm shooting from the hip, half of the photos are out of focus. Any tips on settings to make sure I can focus quickly and accurately? -I've learned long ago not to trust the image in the LCD, but even when getting the metering even the photos on the EM5 are much darker than the same settings on the 60D. I use spot evaluative metering on both. Is there something I need to do to calibrate the meter or is this typical and I just need to get familiar with the results? I know these are stupid questions, but any insight would help. I really want to enjoy this camera, but am now struggling with buyer's remorse.