Anyone tempted by the mirrorless cameras?

I have Nikon D4 and D800e bodies with practically all lenses form 14 to 400mm, but I travel with Fujifilm X-Pro1 and X100s cameras. With the X-Pro1 I have 14, 35 and 55-200 mm Fujinon lenses, X100s has a fixed 23mm lens (these correspond to 21-300mm on a FF camera). The picture quality equals D4/Canon 5DII, but naturally these are not sports or action cameras. 10-12 page magazine articles have been printed from pictures I have taken with these cameras (Jerusalem, Burma, Petra, Tibet coming shortly). Using these cameras makes interaction easier with the locals, X-Pro1 is quiet, X100s is absolutely noiseless and both look old-fashioned and harmless.

My Nikon bag weighs 12 kg, Fujinon travel set is 2.5 kg. I have even travelled (Israel & Jordan) with everything (meaning photo gear, clothes, toiletries etc) packed into a 24 liter daypack, 7 kg total.

I been using an E-PL3 and now a OM-D E-M5 from Olympus for 2 years now. Those cameras are perfect for travel photography.
http://frugaltravelphotography.blogspot.com/

My APS-C DSLR died a week before leaving on my first trip to Japan. Taking my point & shoot was not an option because of it's image quality. Canon had updated the firmware on the mirrorless Eos M and cut the price in half so I bought one.

I'm 10 days into the trip. The pros and cons of a mirrorless relative to an entry level APS-C DSLR are just what I expected.
Pros: smaller and lighter. Between sensor and the 2 lenses (kit zoom and 22m f2 prime) image quality is good enough for me. Body size & 22mm lens will make this my carry-all-the-time camera when I'm wearing shorts with cargo pockets.
Cons: sometimes difficult to see viewscreen, but much better than my high end 3 year old point and shoot. Slow autofocus but good enough 95% of the time because of what I shoot while traveling.

I'll buy a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera when the viewfinder and autofocus speed are good enough for what I shoot. The panasonic GX-7 may be that camera.