Mark Goldstein at PhotographyBlog has published his review of the Olympus E-3 this morning. I must say that I've been sorely tempted by the E-3 in the process of shopping for a new DSLR. I like its features and its practical advantages such as its physical toughness and waterproofing, and I've been very impressed with its image quality. (And I'm not convinced by arguments against the 4/3rds sensor size, as I will detail in a future column in Black & White Photography magazine).
Alas, I just can't get over the lack of prime lenses in the system, and I've decided I can't buy into the Olympus system for that reason. I'm a prime lens partisan but not a prime lens snob—I've enjoyed using a zoom on my Konica-Minolta 7D, and on the Contax Aria I had in the late '90s. But I require that at least one or two wide-normal semi-fast single-focal-length street-shooting/snapshooting lenses be available in a system as an option.
Were it not for this, I would buy an E-3. It's a beautifully designed and built camera.
UPDATE: You can find my general argument in favor of primes here (although note that I'm not really anti-zoom much any more), and here is the reason I'm not particularly interested in the Leicasonic 25mm ƒ/1.4 (although I am kinda interested in it).