After spending a lot of time with SLR cameras many moons ago before digital I lost the habit, although I still have my Nikon FE and 50mm /1.4 lens in a cupboard as I am loathe to part with it. Settling down with a family 10-15 years ago and not having time or resources for serious photography I was amazed by a couple of compact film cameras - the Yashica T5 and the Olympus mu range which gave sharp as a tack images on a budget, but of course with little control. In 2004 I bought a Nikon D50 but never really fell for it and used my wife"s Canon Ixus a lot more. So I fall into the classic micro 4/3 target audience - I want the convenience of a compact but the quality of something better. I want to cover the whole range (don't we all?) - portraits, travel, landscapes and architecture being my key interests. Anyway, following a lucky bonus I managed to put together a budget of around US$2000 / US$2500 and am thinking of the following set up (with current US Amazon prices...) OM-D EM-5 - Body only $999 Olympus 45/1.8 $399 Panasonic 14 / 2.5 $261 Panasonic 20/1.7 $360 Panasonic 45-175 $299 I have seen the posts rating the 25mm above the 20mm lens but I think the size and lower price of the 20mm win it for me. Am I a fool to reject the standard lenses? Well I think with this set up the 45-175 will be more useful than the 12-50 which is effectively the same price. 14-42 is tempting for a $100 extra on top of the body only price I suppose, but no use if it's not used. And I would rather spend the $100 (alright $139) on an EPL-1 as a spare camera which would seem to work nicely with the 20mm lenses. Any thoughts, tips or advice would be welcome!