Doug... I I believe the E-PL5 + 12-35mm + 35-100mm f2.8 lenses costs $3,000 (or more) right?
The XZ-2 with it's much faster 14-112mm lens cost $300 (or less) and it's much smaller/lighter with that focal range, right?
How can you compare (or try to) a fixed lens camera and a system camera with that price, size and weight difference? They are in two completely difference classifications. Now that I have had my XZ-2 for the past two weeks, I can tell you that in real world shooting, I doubt you could tell the difference in IQ unless viewing at 100% and using a magnifying glass. It's also so small and light, I can hardly feel it in my small belt pouch. If you have money to burn, don't mind carrying and changing lenses, missing shots because the wrong lens is on, more power to you.
Closer to $2500 (subbing the newer and better Olympus 12-40 for the older Panasonic 12-35). And besides, I wouldn't buy that combo with the E-PL5, so it's irrelevant. I would, and in fact did, buy the E-PL5 with prime lenses, including the 14mm, the 25mm, and the Sigma 60mm, and a much longer zoom (45-175mm) than is available on the XZ-2. And in actual fact, I could tell the difference in the IQ between the E-PL5 and the XZ-2 quite easily at any ISO above 800 just using standard size images on a computer monitor. And in actual fact, I've lost MANY more pictures due to shutter or focus lag from a point and shoot than I ever have from changing lenses. At ISOs below 800, the XZ-2 does hold it's own, I will grant you that. And I certainly don't mind changing lenses - why on earth would I? they are meant to be changed as needed.
Also, in actual fact, the Panasonc 35-100mm lens has nearly double the reach at the long net of the lens on the XZ-2, so I don't know why you mentioned it - it is not in any way comparable to the lens on the XZ-2. The XZ-2 lens is not 112mm, it's 112mm equivalent, and the Panasonic 35-100mm lens is 70-200mm equivalent - nearly twice as long. My Sigma 60mm lens is in fact slightly longer than the XZ-2 at it's longest telephoto setting, being a 120mm equivalent.
That being said, there is nothing wrong with the XZ-2 as a fixed lens camera, except that it is not pocketable, and it's sensor is small, which limits it at high ISOs. If I am going to put up with the second limitation, I at least want a genuinely pocketable camera, since it would never be my MAIN camera - and that's why I got the XZ-10 during the last Olympus sale, rather than the XZ-2. Because true pocket-ability was my over-riding concern for that particular purchase. When I don't need pocket-ability, my E-PL5 and multi-lens outfit is far less limited. Again, if it WAS going to be my ONLY camera and lens, then the XZ-2 is better suited to that task. But it was not suited to MY personal task.