Do you thing the A6000 with the 16-50, 35 1.8 and sigma 60 2.8 would be an improvement over my actual equipment? I have no rigs so stabilised lenses are a plus for video. Ideally I'll get a EM5 (II) but the video seems kinda lacking.

On the other side, 4k is very appealing, since I can get better 1080 and crop to stabilise clips, so I'm considering the NX500. I could get the NX500 with the 16-50, the 30 f2 and maybe the 45 1.8. Would this be a better choice, considering overall image quality?

What are your thoughts on lowlight video with this cameras? Does the APS sensor a better job than m4/3? Also any of those other lenses are comparable to the PanaLeica? I like how it renders everything. Which leads me to maybe even consider the G7 and keep the lenses, only the 25mm and then get the 14-42 kit.

Maybe that option makes more sense unless there's a considerable difference with any of the other combos.

I would love to get 120fps (i know the nx500 does it at 720) but the NX1 or GH4 are out of my range. So I'm even considering the new RX100 iv, since the zoom range works great for me, would that be a step back? Specially DR and lowlight performing or the SLOG is an advantage?

Please let me know your thoughts and experiences so I can clear up my mind!

Cheers