I posted this on DPR, too, for those of you who visit both forums, you might have already seen this... Moving over full time to Sony, I am looking at options to replace my Oly 9-18 from m43. I would prefer a zoom, and I love the versatility of the 9-18 in terms of walk-around range, and the size is sure helpful (slow aperture, though). I would also prefer AF over MF. I know there are prime options (rokinon 12, Tuit 12), and I already have a Rokinon 8mm FE that I could de-fish, but I'd rather have an AF zoom. So, I see 3 main choices: 10-18 on the a6000 16-35 on the a7 Oly 9-18 on an m43 body The 10-18/4 on the a6000 is certainly a reasonable size and price, but the DXO marks when I compared to the Oly 9-18 were not great, and much weaker than the 16-35. The FE 16-35 on an a7 body. I KNOW this is a better lens, but I mostly use the UWA for travel, and it looks really big. I'd much rather stay with the a6000 size for travel. If I do the 16-35 on the a7, then do I bring two bodies, or only travel with the a7? While I like my a7 for output, I much prefer the a6000 shooting experience. And we are just talking travel photos here. Keep the Oly 9-18. In selling off my m43 gear, I can't seem to move this lens for anything other than $100 less than what I paid for it this past October. For a little more than $100 additional, I could buy a cheap m43 body (like an EPM2), and just glue it to the Oly 9-18. That lens + body would still be quite small, and the 9-18mm range (18-36mm eq) is more versatile on the long end anyway, than the 10-18. The downside is a different system, batteries, etc. Has anyone compared the 10-18 to these other two options. Thoughts/feedback/examples??