Interesting... need to read some reviews on those...
Let me rephrase on the sensor size: It's not relevant for consumers or "light prosumers". The major advantage of larger sensors is mostly in high ISO as the pixels are larger. But with technology has advanced a lot there recently. In the past pixels have been shrinked (to get more megapixels) but maintaining defacto no noise until ISO ~800. But these days pixel count remains the same (24-36MP) with all the progress going elsewhere, mostly dynamic range and noise reduction. Additionally, noise reduction is also implemented in software. The rest you mention is mostly owed to the lens and being a dedicated camera. But the industry has realized that and tried going with the mirrorles MFT but launched it too early and didn't bring enough commitment to it. MFT was supposed to be (significantly) cheaper than APS-C equipment but the equipment failed to deliver on the price tag, haptics, non-photography features such as geotagging,...
Beyond that the cameras (DSLR in general) lack a lot of "smartness", that includes even the latest ones on the market. Direct Upload to FTP/SMB/...?! Nope. Wireless transfer: *inserttrollface* at 2-3MB/s. Useless for RAW shots. Geotagging: let's rely on satellites only because those work great indoors, and let's use the cheapest chipset that only uses NAVSTAR. And sometimes you just instantly want to send that single photo by mail. SMTP support isn't asked too much. There's sooooo much room for improvement on cameras... I would certainly not put the sensor as a prority these days when it comes to non-professional camera development. "Auxiliary hardware" and software it is. There's a lot to catch up on. That would also help with the lack of dynamic range...
May as well get a dslr.