excellent, if it works well for you.
EM1v2 is a pretty good do-all camera, so yes, it works well for me when I don't need a FF light-bucket or more shallow DoF.
But to me, mFT gear has lost the last bit of appeal, when Canon EOS M and EF-M lenses were launched. Much larger sensor, better RAWs than any Oly camera, similar size/weight and lower system cost (thanks to extremely affordable EF-M lenses). Granted, there are no f/1.2 EF-M primes available, but I don't need or miss them. On an APS-C sensor I [almost] get equivalence with a simple, tiny, dirt-cheap EF-M22 f/2.
I will only dispute 2 points there.
1. lens costs. Oly (and Pany's) kit lenses are actually quite good, super small, light and compact, and still deliver decent optical results if you don't require fast apertures. AND THEY ARE CHEAP.
2. "much better raw" - uhm. NO. not from any metrics I've seen.
Canon sensor is less than 50% larger than 4/3 so less than half a stop advantage, all things being equal.
And all things are not equal. Canon's latest sensor tech performance is much improved but still lags behind the best (which is pretty much everyone else) in IQ.
If you compare metrics with M100 and (older but still flag-bearing) EM1v2 you'll find the Oly still beats the M100 in many key sensor metrics despite the size disparity.
Overall I think Oly was rather lucky that Sony solely focused on their FF lineup over the past 5 years and sort of neglected their APS-C lineup - especially A5### series cameras and decent+affordable E-mount lenses. Otherwise Oly might well already have disappeared by now.
Perhaps the market may have evolved differently if Sony's crop ML were more refined and better promoted. They were tempting but still just not compelling enough vs product from more experienced still camera mfrs.
Don't forget to check the label on what's being used when you go for a colonoscopy.
Chances are it's an Olympus (and they've had more than enough problems in that market!)
In my opinion Oly's decision to move from FT to mFT, will lead to their [mFT/Imaging division] demise. Had they moved to "very compact, decent and affordable" mirrorfree APS-C cameras back then [instead of the retro "Pen" folly and before the first underspecced Canon EOS M was launched] and additionally in 2007 launched a mirrorfree FF system in the spirit of the film OM system [most compact cameras in the market with excellent functionality] they could have had a bright future. They did not and now their lunch is totally being eaten by smartphones, 1" compact cameras (eg Sony RX100) and mirrorfree APS-C systems (Canon, Sony, Fuji).
I'm not going to dredge the sales data for the last decade to argue that opinion but MFT is doing OK considering the niche market ML has been up until recently.
Even a cheap MFT system is far more of a "real" camera than any smartphone.
How things will shake out over the next few years as the 2 biggest names in camera gear jump into the ML market in a committed way remains to be seen.
If Nikon doesn't do it now, or Canon a little later, the MFT group will likely take the next step and introduce global shutter functionality and that will be another useful leap forward for MFT. It's likely more cost-effective to implement GS on a smaller sensor so expect it there first unless Canon and Nikon are afraid enough to deploy it early.
Olympus is hinting at some very impressive goodies for their 100th anniversary in 2019. I'm not sure that would prevent me buying a Nikon Z or 2 in the meantime tho. Next October feels like a very long time to wait right now!