Guess we're polar opposites since I rarely shoot without the VF-2 attached 

I decided to give the EPL-2 some more face time so I spent some time shooting with my Panasonic 20. I partially take back what I said. I still think the camera feels a bit odd in the hand. It's very light and at first you can interprete that as cheap but the more time I spent with it the more I realized the lightness can be pretty nice when carrying it around all day. The bigger (and MUCH better LCD) is nice, as is the higher top shutter speed and the dia on the back. In fact, I think the dial is reason enough to switch from the EPL-1. IQ wise the EPL-2 and the EPL-1 are pretty much identical. The EPL-1 seems to be a bit sharper and the EPL-2 a bit cleaner at high ISO but I suspect that has more to do with the default settings than anything else as they share the same image pipeline. So here I am eating a bit of humble pie and saying that I may just pick up an EPL-2. I like the red one.

FWIW I think the VF2 is the best EVF I have ever used. It makes the one on the Panasonic look like a toy and IMHO is superior to the experience of using the RF on the Leica M8.2.

I don't remember it blacking out, but I was in a fairly dark camera store.

I have to say first of all that I am really not impressed with the camera after actually trying one. Compared to my E-P1, I was expecting it to feel so much more comfortable in my hand, but it definitely didn't. There was only subtle differences, and some of them I really didn't even like. The one thing that I definitely did like however was the new kit lens, I definitely have to get me one of those. That thing focuses so smoothly and easily that it makes the original lens look ancient.

Overall though, the improved LCD and new features didn't really make me not like my E-P1 as much, but I did get to try a VF-2 for the very first time, and I didn't really like that either, the image was very jello-like for an EVF.

This confirms what I have felt all along about the PLs as compared to the P1/2 camera. I have never been tempted since getting my E-P1 a year ago. Surprising, however, is your take on the EVF.  I read a ton of posts on the EVF question (to have or not to have, that is the question)--, the outcome was that I decided to go with the EP-1 and forego the P2. In all those posts, I swear I cannot recall anyone NOT LIKING it. I dislike the way the EVF looks on the camera and felt at the time I made my decision that it was an expensive and not strictly necessary duplication of the LCD function. But to say it produces a "jello-like" image!? Wow.

On a humorous side, I wish people like you, Voyager, would stop praising the 14-42 Mark II. How am I going to get rid of my Mark I when ever one is saying how much better the new version is?

From what I can see, the MarkII is what Olympus should've put out with the E-P1 in the first place (especially since the early E-P1s were pushing $1000....) Can't believe they just recently discovered how to make a quiet lens, when Canon has had USM zooms for umpteen years. The cynic in me says they did this only to match the other cheapo DSLR kit zooms at the time.

Technology is usually covered by patents. Not sure about this issue, but they might have needed the time to make it work without infringing someone else's patents.
BTW, the 14-150 is unbelievably quiet too.

Good point, adash. Though I still don't know how Olympus could have bragged about the E-P1's video capabilities with the original kit lens. Good to see that they've ported the focussing technology from the 14-150 and 9-18 back to their "economy" kit lens though.