Well, I intend to try and rent an NX1 if LensRentals gets them. I don't think they currently rent Samsung gear. If not, I may simply buy one and try it out for 20 days, and return it if it has any major issues. I could probably rent a 7D II and buy a step wedge and provide some data for people to look at.
I've seen a couple reviews where the reviewers seemed to think the AF system performed quite well. I think it's fairly easy to cherry pick reviews (from the countless reviewers that are out there now) to demonstrate the opinion you want. I've stopped bothering with that myself, as it's never a winning situation...it doesn't resolve any clashing opinions, and the other side just ends up digging up some of the reviews that cater to their existing opinions to share.
I wish there was some kind of objective way to compare data from DPR. You can make subjective judgements based on what you think you see as far as comparing the images they provide in their little comparison tool. That has the same problem though...people don't see the same things. Both literally and figuratively...we all perceive things differently, but we also all have different screens with different calibrations, brightness and contrast settings, etc. Some people's screens reveal terrible aspects of my photography that make me feel like I want to barf, yet when I view the same image on my screen, it's fine. I have a high end, high quality, calibrated screen...they do not.
That's why I've tried to start measuring standard deviations, maximums and minimums, etc. with PixInsight. It's one of the very few ways I know of to produce objectively comparable data. So far, PixInsight is telling me that the NX1 image has a bit lower noise than the 7D II image. I'm not saying it's a world-shattering difference...but it seems to place the NX1 firmly between the 7D II and 5D III on the image quality scale. It's by no means an A7s competitor, nor even a 1D X competitor...and no one should have ever expected that. But as far as an APS-C getting closer to a 5D III full frame camera in IQ...I think the NX1 is currently the closest. (Based on the only objective data I've been able to get a hold of so far, anyway.)
If I ever do produce some step-wedge images for comparison between cameras, I have no doubt that there will be just as much subjectivity and controversy on what those images "tell" us as any other comparison image. For the same reasons that DPR's comparison tool and the diversity of camera reviews with wildly differing opinions produce nothing more than subjective opinions and controversial results.
I think that getting an objective across the board review method to compare one camera sensor (or other feature)to another is almost impossible...and the things is does it really matter and what will it prove?
People buy brands for all sorts of reasons, not just because some reviewer out there has proven that it is the best.
Here are some 'other' reasons why I stick with Canon:
I have used it since day 2 (day 1 was a Ricoh KR5)
My Old F1 was superb, I loved the shutter sound and I thought it was the best looking slr out there.(I was very young then) so that experience build quite a solid neuron path!
I still think Canon's 'look' better than Nikons's....( but the old Nikon F was pretty cool looking too and of course the Leica M is the best looking of the lot)
I think the 6D, for the money and features, is just great, I use it everyday for my job. (The new Alpha 7mk2 is also a pretty cool and desirable camera, but I am not convinced of the lens corner sharpness of the alpha lenses)
I have an Eos M, which despite all the bad press, is actually quite a nice little backup toy and a 'everyday take with me everywhere' camera... and with the adapter works just perfectly with all my EF lenses and integrates perfectly with the rest of my system. Its got the same sensor as the 'old7D' and frankly I am not sure what all the fuss is about...I get pretty good image quality.( I would love to have a Sony RX1, but I dont want to mix systems and its priced out of my league)
EF, lenses at their best, is up there with the best....( but so is the new sigmas, but I am weary of interface problems)
What a system, there is just everything there that I need and could possibly want! ( but Nikon also has a kickass system)
As an example, I just got myself a Selphy printer to use on my travels when photographing people. I can give them a print immediately and I am hoping it will make the interactions easier etc etc. The printer is tiny and fits in my camera bag so I can carry it around. (battery powered) It can print directly from my camera via wifi. How cool is that?
The thing is most people will have their reasons why they stick or change to a brand...no tests reviews comparisons etc etc will make them change until they want to change....some of us are so deep into a brand that we cannot change unless we are wiling to lose a lot of money...but then there are those who swop and cahnge at the drop of a hat...good luck to them...
But the biggest single reason why I am sticking with what I have got is because it gives me what I want. No matter how bad the 'DR' range is according to the experts, for me it is more than good enough and very seldom do I run into a situation where I wish I had more DR or cleaner shadows. Sometimes I wish I had a bit more resolution. But, last week I made a heavily processed and manipulated print from a 6D image. I printed it large...61x 80cm....and I was totally impressed with the image quality, and I 'only' printed it at the 'normal' setting on my printer....I know I can get even better quality if I play around a bit...
So the thing is technology from any and all brands can give us stunning image quality right now...some a 'bit' better than others but all, imo, good enough
That is not to say that its not amusing and even sometimes even interesting and educational reading and comparing and debating on the forums, but really things are pretty good right now as it is...( And yes, even the Canon stuff is good no matter what anyone says!)