I'm not trying to tell you what to buy, but I'd like to know your reasons for choosing some of the better m4/3s lenses over Sony's FF mirrorless camera. Why you are NOT selling m4/3s: I'm not getting out of m4/3s either. With many of the lenses it's still much smaller and cheaper than the Sony: 12-32, 14, 17, 20, 25, 45, 60, etc. And when it comes to low-light, 5-axis IBIS will often allow you to match or beat the FF cameras in low-light, especially if you have a 42/0.95 or a 75/1.8. And speedboosting an 85/1.4 or 50/1.7 can be a lot of fun with great bokeh. But... My question is for those who have the more expensive lenses like the 42/1.2, 25/0.95, 75, 12-40, etc. Those lenses are an average of $1000 each. I really do want the 42/0.95 for some massive subject separation and the 75 for its awesomeness. I find myself wanting more separation; and buying say, the 19/0.95, 42/1.2, and 75/1.8 would run $3000 whereas an A7 would run $1200 and adapting decent 20, 28, 35, 40, 50, 85, 135 lenses to it would cost very little and still get good subject separation (yes, I know with it's cheap, fast lenses and IBIS m4/3s has its advantages in low light; large DOF at lower apertures, etc.). So, I guess my question is, since you have m4/3s already, what is the benefit of buying a few of these more expensive lenses over buying the A7?