If Kodak had been able to produce something like the New Portra in 1970, it would have made a tremendous difference for half-frame. As it was, the emulsions of the time were great for snapshots, but amateurs couldn't get the great results they were used to on the format, because of the photo-processors not having the capability and because emulsions just weren't good enough. Ironically, because emulsions are so much better now than they were then, the Pen series film cameras are a fantastic deal.
You get APS-C level quality in a tiny package, and get 48-72 photos per roll. For those who process and scan their own negatives, quite good results can be had from a Pen, and while film savings are negligible, process and chemical savings are not negligible. For a PEN, I would shoot Portra 160, 400, 800, Velvia 50 and 100, and Ilford film through it for maximum image detail. It's nice for portraits, as it has a comfortable portrait orientation. Depth of field is deeper than you're used to for 35mm, but it's very usable. It's better than 110, better than those horrible disk cameras Kodak built, and you hardly have to carry any film, as one 36 exposure roll will last a whole day of tourism for the average photographer, or half a portrait shoot for the pro. No motor, so you're going to have some thumb exercise.