75/1.8 is not for me (family/enthusiast photographer)

To each his own I guess:

The AF speed on the 75/1.8 is noticeably slower than the PL 25/1.4. Most reviewers say it's "acceptable". I disagree. The AF is slow enough to render useless the C-AF Tracking mode for Continuous Shooting on my E-PM2. Results may differ on other bodies. I personally find the C-AF TR CS mode to be a DSLR-killer when photographing kids who are "moving around a lot but not running towards the camera", when used with the 25/1.4, but with the 75/1.8 the C-AF TR mode devolves into a useless gimmick.

Can't say I ever bother to use CAF on the E-M5 or any other Oly body, but I find the focus speed on the 75 fast when used in SAF.

This is touted as a portrait lens, but I find it too sharp for portraits of adult female family members. I had to apply a Soft Focus effect before I could show my wife the test photos I took of her. Results may differ if you use a professional make-up artist, or photographing kids with perfect skin.

For me this aspect of the lens is a definite plus. You can't add detail back in post. This is why people pay a fortune for Leica lenses (they resolve detail at this level).

The focal length really is too long for family photos. It is difficult to compose in a typical household setting, where walls and furniture gets in the way, and it's difficult to compose when in a family activity outdoors, because you need to step away at least 10-20 feet. And if I'm going to be outside I'd rather carry a zoom, or the 25/1.4 to capture some environmental context with just enough blur.

I agree it's a longer focal length and difficult to use indoors, but I find it great to use outdoors and no problem to add the kind of details you mentioned.

Generally speaking the 75/1.8 does nothing to improve the quality of OOC JPEGs. There's still the issue of skin tones (see my other threads). I was hoping it might somehow outperform the 25/1.4 in color rendition and fix the skin tone issue, but it doesn't, it's just sharper.
The 75/1.8 now costs the same as a D7000. It has put my whole commitment to m43 into question... I was initially thinking to dump the DSLR, now I'm more inclined to keep both systems, with each doing what it's best at. D7000 for indoor and non-environmental portraits. E-PM2 for everything else, including, environmental portraits.

Again, to each his own. I'm not aware of a lens that would change the characteristics of jpegs colour output as you describe (I know some lenses are "warmer" but this seems like a stretch).

I hate having to return lenses. Does anybody know if I would find the 45/1.8 useful based on the above comments? Is anybody else using C-AF TR on an E-PM2?

I cannot help with your jpeg colour issues but the the 45 is a significantly easier focal length to deal with. It's also very sharp but perhaps a hair (1-5%) less sharp than the 75. The only M43s body I've seen really good CAF performance out of is the GH3.

--
http://sgoldswoblog.wordpress.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sgoldswo/