I guess it is a difference of opinion then. 

The interface and operation of the GF1 is very similar to that of all 3 of my dSLRs where the NEX 5 is like a point and shoot.  The NEX system IS more intuitive for a shooter who doesn't want any control over what they are shooting, if that is what you want, it is perfect, but that to me is not good.  I want to control the exposure as opposed to just pushing a button.  To me photography is more than just taking a picture, it is a journey to capture a picture.  For the times that I don't want to think, I can use the "iA" (intelligent auto) on the GF1 and it does a good job of doing what a NEX type camera does, so to me it is there if I want it, but I can choose where and when I want to use it. 

For instance, on the NEX5, I wanted to open up the lens to max aperture, which to gain the proper exposure I needed to decrease the ISO.  My subject was substantially backlit so I wanted to switch to spot metering so that I could get a reading from their face and adjust my shutter speed to account for my exposure compensation.  By the time I was able to get all of that dialed in, my subject was long gone.  On my GF1, it is the matter of setting to Ap priority pushing the metering button, choosing spot, hitting the ISO button, stopping down and then clicking the thumbwheel to adjust my exposure comp (6-8 seconds tops).  It took me that long to change my ISO on the NEX5.  This is my point.  I'm sure many people will really enjoy the NEX system, and I feel Sony did a great job on designing the camera body, but really ignored any serious photographer who wants easy control over simple exposure settings like we have with our dSLRs (like the Panasonics, or Olympuses, or even the Samsung).  Enough said.

Best,

Tyson

I have certainly felt that the micro 4/3 lot NEEDS to play to the potential for smaller optics period, as I see it as the only real way to compete with the new direction the Sony cams have taken. Smaller sensor = smaller image circle = smaller lens.

I know that many like to pixel peep, but for me, if IQ is the only criteria I will shoot with my full frame cameras and high end lenses. For a compact camera, I want exactly that, compact. While IQ and noise performance are important, I will take a fully functional compact camera over a stop or two of high ISO noise performance (that I can deal with in post if necessary). The NEX cameras are nice, but they are cool point and shoot cameras at best. The micro 4/3 cams offer the shooter full manual control in a very similar fashion to that of a dSLR system camera. That control is far and away more important to me than a bit more resolution, or a one stop advantage, etc. If Sony addresses this with its next camera, then I think it will spell trouble for Panolympus (assuming they also don't address the lack of small pancake lenses for the m4/3 system as well). But currently, if you want a fully functional, easily controlled, pocket sized interchangeable lens camera, the GF1 and PENs are your only real choices right now. (I consider having to go through multiple menus to change ISO, WB, et al to be a hindrance beyond what I would be willing to deal with and expect from a system camera.)