I read a comment recently about the NEX7 being the poor man's M9. That struck me as funny because in my world the NEX7 is still too spendy for me to think about picking up. Granted by comparison it is a lot cheaper than an M9. In fact a NEX7 and a nice 50/2 Summicron could probably be had for less than the M9 body alone. That said, it still seems like rarified air to me. I'd drop that kind of money on 3 tickets to Europe but a camera...don't think so. I just dipped my toes into the NEX waters by picking up a used NEX-C3. It's not a NEX7 or 5n but to me it seemed like a lot of camera for not much money. I plan on pairing it up with my Hexanon 24/2.8 and rather than a poor man's M8 (I'm adjusting downward) I am hoping to have a small camera that is evocative of the first cameras I every used...70's compact RF cameras. Granted there is no RF (although the RF on my Konica S3 or Olympus 35RC weren't exactly roomy). I am hoping the NEX-C3 is a decent re-interpretation of that idea...small, great lens (I guess that part is up to me), easy to manually focus, creative controls and most of all fun. FWIW the M9 (and M8 as well) are what they are. I don't think its possible to have a poor man's M because the very nature of the M means it is not a poor man's anything. I like Leica glass but I got to play with an M8 for a while and it sure didn't seem to be something I would want. It was nice but just not for me.