Looks at the size/cost of the glass though. Zeiss 24 looks great but its $1000 and pretty big.
55-210 is pretty huge, and stuff like the 18-55 and 16mm weren't that good on the 14mm NEX5 I had, so even worse on 24meg I'm sure.
Where m4/3 has its advantage isn't in IQ, because thats the bottom of the pack, but in the selection of glass, that isn't only good quality, but also very compact and also pretty cheap.
20mm f1.7 for sub $400, 45mm 1.8 for $400 etc. These are really good lenese with nice image, bokeh etc, and yet weight mere ounces and are small enough to fit in a pocket and cheap enough to buy a few focal lengths.
Whole reason I went m4/3, NEX etc was I wanted a compact solution for when I ddn't want to take a DSLR and that had better IQ than a compact.
Given its only for those times when I'm on a trip etc where I'd want such as system in the first place, I didnt' really want to spend a ton of money either.
I guess if you wanted to build your main system around a NEX thats one thing, but with and prices its getting a little big/heavy. Might as well go A77 and have way more lenses options etc for that type of money.
NEX really needs some decent quality, pancake primes at sub $500 IMHO
Its a great form factor body and its fun to shoot, but it needs to offer a few lenses you can pickup without breaking the bank, toss into a pocket and just go shoot on a walk etc.
Thats where the camera excels.
$1400 body with a $1000 lens thats as big as any other APS-C lens ? I've already got that covered with my DSLR's