I've owned and loved my D7000 since I purchased it at release. It has been an incredible camera but like a lot of others I find it often too big to bring to places and incredibly heavy. My gear consists of the D7000, 18-105, 50mm 1.8 G, Tamron 28-75 2.8, and Sigma 75-300 APO DG. After reading a lot about the OM-D I decided that it just might be the camera for me with the correct lenses. I ordered from Amazon last with with the 12-50 last week and received it yesterday. I am getting the Panny 20mm 1.7 tomorrow (birthday present) and if I like the kit I will probably get the Oly 40-150mm to cover my tele needs. The only lens I cannot duplicate is the Tamron but I can live with good primes. Over the next couple of weeks I plan on hauling both cameras and shooting with each. The photos below were just me messing around, in the future I plan on using a tripod and trying to match up the focal lengths. I am usually not a pixel peeper but I do care about sharpness. So far the 12-50 easily matches the 18-105 which was a relief. Reading some of the reviews of the 12-50 make me doubt that lens. If I keep the Oly kit I will use it for a lot of video so the power zoom is a very nice feature. In the images below Nikon is always on the left, Oly on the right. All JPEG images are straight out of the camera. ISO 3200 RAW images, 18-105 at 105mm f/5.6, Oly 12-50 at 50mm f/6.3 View attachment 213892 Same image JPEG. View attachment 213893 Base ISO RAW images, 18-105 at 18mm f/8.0, Oly 12-50 at 12mm f6.3 zoomed in Lightroom View attachment 213894 Bottom left corner of an image, base ISO RAW images, 18-105 at 18mm f/8.0, Oly 12-50 at 12mm f6.3 View attachment 213895 There is extreme CA with the 18-105. Same image jpeg: View attachment 213896 18mm f/8.0, 12mm f/5.0 View attachment 213897 The OM-D sky looks like I had a polarizer on the lens. Does LR pull in info from the JPEG processing? Maybe it's the difference between 12mm and 18mm? This is one reason why I need to "normalize" the focal lengths when comparing. There is a huge difference in the white balance record in the RAW images. The noise is comparable and the OM-D keeps up with the D7000 really well. I am impressed so far but it is still the honeymoon period. Of the photos I've taken (not shown) I am really liking the look of the SOOC JPEGs of the OM-D. With my D7000 I usually do a lot of post processing, almost always with the white balance (see ISO 3200 image above). Lightroom's Auto white balance does not do as good of a job as the OM-D did SOOC. Tonight I am golfing with my son and I plan on bringing the OM-D to put it through it's paces. I've taken the D7000 many times so it will be interesting to see how I like the size and the results of the night (both golf and photography).