If you ask me if I have a long term plan for my equipment evolution, the answer is yes and no. I have a loose plan, and it tends to change. Overall, at this minute, I would say that I intend to stick with Micro 4:3 for 4K video work (the Yi-M1 is actually doing quite well, and I can use it for 2K 4:3 format video as an extra bonus), and I am using my Sony a5000 for some still photography. I have in-lens stabilization in the Panasonic GM1 for "Full-HD" video and still photography, but it only works with Panasonic lenses. I have wanted "in body image stabilization" (IBIS) to cover my growing collection of "non-native" lenses. I cannot afford an IBIS Sony body right now. Even if I found a used one, it be too costly for me. Lately, the older Olympus OM-D series bodies have shown up as people have traded up to 4K video bodies and 20MP. There were some first generation E-M10 and E-M5 bodies I could afford. I decided on an E-M10 because it had a built-in flash as well as a hot shoe. The Sony a5000 and Panasonic GM1 have no hot shoes and the Yi-M1 has no built in flash. I liked having a body with both. Price-wise, I could have bought an E-M5 for $50 Cdn more, but without its "included" external flash. I value the flash at $50-$100 Cdn., so the price jump is actually a lot more than it sounds. I would have liked the E-M5 splash-proofing and better battery and more advanced IBIS but, I guess that might be something for the future. Anyway, I now have a used E-M10, and in late June, I took it out for my first test run. I used my Olympus 40-150mm and a monopod. Yes, I plan on using IBIS with a monopod. I am old and shaky, and it never hurts to have more stabilization. These pictures are based on out of camera JPEGs. Out of them only one "P6200039b-rsz1840-C1.JPG" has been substantially changed. I brought down the exposure too far trying to protect highlights, so I used Corel Paintshop Pro X9 Smartfix to brighten and sharpen it. All the other files are just reduced in size. I took extra time to find optimum sizes that allowed "C1" compression -- the highest detail level allowed in JPEG. Ironically, that means that the "best" original pictures often end up the smallest. In most cases if I upload a file in a reduced size, I could post an "detail" file that would be very impressive. Unfortunately, "P6200018a-rsz2120-C1.JPG" is a rare exception. This "reduced" version is about the best it can be. The problem was caused by auto-focus. The most important parts of the picture are the clusters of small white flower that are in the sunlight. But they are screened by foreground plants which I could not "get around". If I could have focussed manually, I think I could have found a mid-point and covered both with depth of field. If not, then I would have chosen to focus on the white flowers. But I did not know how to get the E-M10 to focus manually on that day. When I got home I immediately checked the manual and learned to focus manually. Unfortunately, I could only return a week later to try again, and by then the flowers were gone. I checked "The Field Guide to Weeds", Lawrence J. Crockett (Copyright 1977) and I think it looks like "robinia pseudoacacia" (black locust -- poisonous). If it was, then this might have been "pruning waste" rather than new plants. At any rate, I might see it again next year. [2018-07-12 14:37] I forgot to post the EXIF data before: P6200015.JPG - quiet pond Partial EXIF Software Version 1.3 Date and Time Jun 20, 2018 17:08:48 Pixel height 3456 Pixel width 4608 Component configuration YCbCr Exposure program Normal program Scene capture type Standard Exposure mode Manual exposure Exposure bias -2.30 ev Exposure time 1/160 sec. F number f/4.7 Max aperture f/4.0 Focal length 74.0 mm ISO speed 320 Metering mode Center weighted average Custom rendered Normal processing Gain control High gain up P6200018.JPG - white flowers Partial EXIF (from JPEG): Date taken 2018-06-20 17:09 Program name Version 1.3 Dimensions 4608 x 3456 Bit depth 24 Resolution unit 2 Color representation sRGB F-stop f/5.1 Exposure time 1/250 sec. ISO speed ISO-250 Exposure bias -2.7 step Focal length 105mm Max aperture 4 Metering mode Center Weighted Average P6200039.JPG - apple? Partial EXIF Software Version 1.3 Jun 20, 2018, 17:20:01 Pixel height 3456 Pixel width 4608 Component YCbCr Color space sRGB Exposure mode Manual exposure Exposure bias -1.00 ev Exposure time 1/250 sec. F number f/5.6 Max aperture f/4.0 Focal length 150.0 mm ISO speed 800 Metering mode Center weighted average Gain control High gain up Corel PaintShop Pro X9 processing: Smartfix Brightness Overall 28 Shadows -10 Highlights 20 Focus 48 Black 4 White 26 P6200058.JPG - red roses w/shadow backdrop Partial EXIF Software Version 1.3 Date and time Jun 20, 2018 17:29:07 Pixel height 3456 Pixel width 4608 Component configuration YCbCr Color space sRGB Exposure program Normal program Scene capture type Standard Exposure mode Manual exposure Exposure bias -1.00 ev Exposure time 1/400 sec. F number f/6.3 Max aperture f/4.0 Focal length 116.0 mm ISO speed 200 Metering mode Center weighted average Gain control Low gain up P6200062.JPG - rest stop in the shade Partial EXIF Software Version 1.3 Date and time Jun 20, 2018 17:31:36 Pixel height 3456 Pixel width 4608 Component configuration YCbCr Color space sRGB Exposure program Normal program Scene capture type Standard Exposure mode Manual exposure Exposure bias -1.00 ev Exposure time 1/250 sec. Fnumber f/6.3 Max aperture f/4.0 ISO speed 200 Metering mode Center weighted average Gain control Low gain up Issues: Looking at the EXIF data for the whole set of pictures (more than just the ones I am posting), the only issue I see is that the "Max aperture" is always reported as F4.0 -- even when zoomed to its maximum 150mm. The lens model has been around for a long time now and I checked the web for any updates recently. It is an unusual issue but not terrible.