I don't yet own a G-series camera, but I've enjoyed using friends' G1 and G2 cameras for shooting stills: I like the size & the mirrorless system & the results. For my next camera, I intend to get a G-series, but because I also want to use it for video, I won't get a G1. Having a touch screen is important for me, so I won't get a GF1.

My budget is too small for anything except a GF2 or G2. I am in the UK, so will probably be restricted to buying European models. If I buy a new G2, my friend who has an old G2 may be willing to swap it for my new one because he doesn't care about being able to hack his camera. If I get a GF2, I'd probably be on the lookout for a secondhand EVF or other compact solution (angled screen loupe?) to let me frame shots from angles that don't let me see the camera's back.

I hope to be able to do most of my work with the camera without having to own more than one compatible zoom lens (with stabilisation) and one compatible prime lens.

I care more about flexibility & convenience than about whether the camera gives 1080p/1080i. For instance: - ability to use 3rd party batteries - not having a video length limit - low light performance, especially in video mode - ability to get "film-like" video (other than by using low DOF & other such cinematographic techniques), e.g. anamorphic video. - manual control options - ease with which settings can be changed, including transition from video mode to stills mode and back again - ability to frame shots from above rather than behind the camera, using an inexpensive (<£100) add-on if necessary.

On each of these counts, how do the (hacked) GF2 and G2 compare?

I've googled extensively before asking the above, but I'm still uncertain. Please feel free to post relevant links instead of answering my question directly :)