Upgrading - Sony or Olympus?

IMHO or two cents worth, there are no perfect camera. There are many trade off an that is why there are many brands to choose from. It is a lot less stressful if you don't let the sale person talk you into buying one big expensive system. Instead, buy the minimal to get start (ie: one lens and one body) and nothing else (aka: skip the extra battery or filters). Use it for a while, if you don't like it, you can always un-load it in the used market. If you don't overbuy, this path is not that expensive.

I think you should look at the Nikon J1 and V1, or a regular DSLR. The NEX 5n is slow to autofocus and does not track well (e.g. kids or pets in motion). The new EP models are slightly better but still not competitive with even low-end DSLR. Nikon J1 with 10-30 lens (27-81) is only $599 now.

The Olympus has many more lenses available for it, and is general a smaller system package than the Sony. It all depends on what you want. For wildlife, the reach you get out of m4/3s is greater as well, due to the crop factor. Personally, between the two systems, it is a no-brainer for me, I personally would get m4/3 hands down. Other people may be just as sold the other way round, however. Have you played with both?

Hi Amanda,
How low is your low light criteria? Could you use flash in such situations? These cameras were not designed for low light really. Are you going the mirrorless route for size?

It's a tough one. And not to confuse you more, but I think the Samsung NX system is worth a look too. I reviewed all the options available these days here.

I have the E-PL2 - I picked it because of IBIS and because there was a lens in its lineup that I was very interested in. I am very happy with it and I can tell you that IBIS doesn't have any negative effect on IQ. Lens IS can have an impact if it's not properly implemented, but I've been using cameras with IBIS for almost 5 years now and never had any issues related to their IBIS system. The E-PL2 costs about as much as an E-PM1 but has a nicer larger body - otoh, the E-PM1 has the latest AF improvements - that doesn't matter for me, because I manually focus - it's extremely easy with these cameras. I reviewed my E-PL2 here.

The NEX looks promising, but for me, the lack of IBIS and of interesting lenses has kept me away. If they would make a body with IBIS and more interesting lenses, I'd pick one. I find their straight cylinder style of lenses to be rather ugly and contrasting with the nice camera bodies. I want to get an APS-C sensor based camera to use with my DSLR lenses, but right now there is no body with IBIS (well, technically there is the Pentax K-01, but I want a camera to which I could add an EVF). Samsung NX looks interesting and I heard a rumor that they are considering adding IBIS to their bodies. I like the look of their cameras and lenses better than for NEX (yeah, I know, I shouldn't care about looks, but if I don't like the look of my equipment, it won't tempt me to use it and if I don't use it, it doesn't matter at all).

If you don't mind bumping the budget and working with a larger camera and lenses, I've been quite impressed by the Sony A65 - it has the electronic viewfinder of the A77 and NEX-7 and I think the sensor too, but all in a more affordable package. And I liked the feel of that camera in my hands too.

If you have no style preferences and no lens requirements (you just want the kit lens), then get the NEX5N - it probably has the best performance at high ISO and you'll need that indoors with the slow kit lens. You'll probably end up shooting at ISO 1600 most of the time. If you want to get more lenses, the MFT system (Olympus/Panasonic) has the most extensive selection right now - the NEX-5N will grow but it may take a year or two for them to catch up - same for NX. You can compare lens lineups at B&H using the mount filter on the left of the listings. Here's the page. The E-PL2 is my favorite low light camera, but I use it with a very fast lens and I rarely need to bump the ISO past 200. Here is the dxomark sheet comparing NEX-5N, E-PM1, and NX11. If you don't like the look of NX11, check the NX 200 or NX 100. Low light shooting is pretty challenging - most people use flashes, but if you prefer to not use them, as I do, you might find it helpful to read about my experience here and here - there are observations that can help you whether you shoot at high iso or with a fast lens or with a combination of both.

Hope this helps. I know it's confusing with all these choices - this is a period of transition in the industry and all companies are trying to carve their path. It will be much easier in a couple of years when the dust settles, but who can wait that much, right?

I have had my hands on the Olympus, and I did really like the feel. I'm actually headed out later today to do that. I was concerned about the fixed screen on the Olympus at first, but the more I messed with it, the less I thought it would be an issue.

You did your homework well, Amanda. I own both systems, the sony and m4/3rd. Both are good for different things. And if you shoot mainly in good light, outdoors then I wouldn't rule out the nikon J/V1 as Bill mentioned above. I have no experience with the samsung.

My goodness - thank you so much for the help, everyone!
Starvy - I do like the smaller size of these cameras, but I always had a larger P&S. I never had a pocket camera before, so a regular DSLR isn't out of the question. Ideas?
As far as low light, I would be shooting indoors or in dark aquariums. I haven't ruled out a second, smaller P&S for these things, though.
Also, Tommy Lee, very solid point on there not being any one 'perfect' camera. Oh wouldn't that be the greatest?

Have you considered just getting a relatively inexpensive "entry-level" DSLR? They aren't really very big, unless you put a big lens on them (not unlike the mirrorless cameras). Lots of cameras are nice novelties for people who already have other "serious" cameras to play with, but nothing beats the versatility and quickness of a small DSLR. Put an equally inexpensive fast f/1.8 lens on it, and you've got as good a low light camera as it gets (not to mention much more ability to play around with depth of field).

P.S. I wrote this without having read a single review about any camera.