I asked this in another thread and thought it may be worthy of it's own:
I am definitely going to jump into an MILC. My goal is a smaller light weight system for travel and just every day use. I recently got to use a friends Fuji X-pro and couldn't find any real drawbacks for general use over my dSLR.
Where I'm struggling is whether to go APS-C or MFT?
The Sony a6300 with the 16-50 retractable (e.g. pancake) lens cost $50US more than a Pany GX85 with the 12-32 pancake lens and is only 20g heavier. The size difference is also negligible. Overall performance, iso, focus, resolution, etc, definitely goes to the Sony. IMO, with the standard kit lens the Sony wins hands down. Beyond this things get a little fuzzier.
For a small easy to pocket/travel MFT kit I could add the Pany 35-100mm f/4.0-5.6 pancake lens and a 20/1.7 prime. While the zoom optics may not be great, this kit is appealing and the price is ~$450US less than a comparable Sony (55-210 and 35/1.8) kit.
The downside to the Sony kit is once you add a medium zoom. The Sony 55-210, their "kit" medium zoom kit lens, is twice as long retracted and 2.5x the weight. The same is true for the Sony 35/1.8, it's just shy of being twice as long and twice the weight. Albeit, it's still a small and light lens.
I keep feeling if Sony decides to come out with a retractable ~50-200mm lens for the alpha, it could put a last nail in the MFT coffin. At least for people looking at starter kits. Size becomes moot. Megapixels still means a lot to people and 24 vs 16 is significant. For reference, iPhone 7 has 12Mp and the iPhone 8 has 16Mp.
I'm not planning on getting rid of any of my Canon gear anytime soon. This MILC kit would just be supplemental. And yes, I've put a lot of thought into this, that's what I do! Mainly because once I jump in I will stick with it for many years.