Hi guys, despite me saying to myself that my M4/3 kit was simply a travel alternative to my Nikon full frame kit, I'm finding that I've haven't picked the Nikon's --up in 2 months now, and I have have GAS for M4/3 equipment, that's how impressed I've been with M4/3. I now have some decent lenses for my OMD-EM1 and GX7 - namely the Olympus - 12-40 F2.8, 60mm Macro, 45mm F1.8, 9-18 UWA & the Panasonic 7-14 F4, 20mm F1.7, 14mm F2.5, 14-140 II, 100-300 OIS and the 45-200 OIS. Now I am looking to rationalise my lenses somewhat (get rid of the 9-18 for instance now I have the 7-14), but one "pro" lens I'm missing is the 35-100 F2.8 (70-200 F2.8 FF equivalent). So here's my question, taking the wide F2.8 aperture aside, how much better in terms of pure image quality is the 35-100 F2.8 than the Panasonic 45-200 within the same focal range ? My copy seems pretty sharp up until about 175mm, but at 200mm get a tad soft, but certainly within the same range as the 35-100 looks pretty decent. I know the 35-100 is a pro lens and better made, faster etc, but in terms of pure image quality, am I missing out by not having this lens, or should I trade the 9-18 Olympus and the 45-200 for one of them ? I ask as Panasonic seem to be having a bit of a supply problem in the UK, and very few (if any) companies have this lens in stock to try. Thoughts please.