I keep watching the development of the Fuji system. I really would like to jump in, for various reasons.
Coming from the old OM and Minolta film era, the Fujis, just look right, and bring back the tactical controls, that real equipment "should" have.
I crave a higher level of "clean" detail, with less digital noise, for landscape/nature work.
The fuji's slightly larger bodies, actually would be an advantage, for old arthritic hands.( DSLR would work fine for that, but, I don't want to go back to the "flopping" mirror.)
Now, the why nots.
Cannot afford to keep feet, in both systems.
Amazed at how many people leave m4/3 for a while, and then return, in spite of the many "disadvantages".
I've been in the 4/3, m4/3 camp, ( with a few excursions outside) for several years, beginning with the E-500, and several models, leading to the "stopgap" E-pm1, I am holding until my daughter visits from out of state. We now have 6 and maybe 7 members of my immediate family with m4/3 cameras, spread across several states. (It makes it handy for trading gear)
It seems un-daddy like, to get everyone "in", and then jump ship.
And, better, is not always better. (greener grass) What I've been using for several years, has been, and is still working. But being human, I still want to try that grass on the other side.
So I still hang around here, looking.
I understand your predicament, especially if you're so much invested in micro four thirds already. I suspect a lot of those who left m4/3 and came back were early adopters when AF was still an issue. I crossed over not necessarily looking for greener pastures but to try out what all this fuss was about. I did my research and knew about the AF issue going into Fuji; maybe that's why I didn't come out disappointed. Overall, the pros outweighed the cons for me by a substantial degree. Fast forward 9 months, here I am now -- full-on Fuji. :clap2:
Since the X-E2 came out (and now with the X-T1), the biggest argument for micro four thirds (AF issue) has dissipated. Fuji's lenses are bigger but not much bigger and they're all top notch with the kicker being that none of them cost an arm and a leg (e.g. Panasonic and soon-to-be released Olympus pro zooms). For me, AF was never the driving motivation but rather the 5-axis IBIS. Yes, I miss it and may pick up an E-M6 down the line.
The biggest debate is image quality. I believe that micro four thirds is more than "good enough" for most photographers' needs so we'll leave it at that. But I will provide a concrete example to attest to what's attractive about Fuji -- my wifey. My wife stuck with MFT when I migrated over. We frequently go out and shoot together so when we compare images from our photo shoots, she sees the differences with image quality, mainly with noise level, white balance, and color rendering. I did her a favor and sold some of her lenses and picked her up a gorgeous, sleek brown X-M1 (500usd) with the 27/2.8 pancake (200usd) and 60/2.4 macro (400usd). She got to keep her E-M5, 25/1.4 and 75/1.8. Now, she's coming around to the decision of selling it all and picking up an X-T1.
It's not too late to re-invest the family in Fuji. If anything, you'll be able to capitalize on the ongoing sale.