I've been shooting with two of the cameras on your list. The HX9V and the RX100. I also have a Panasonic SDT-750, a TM 900 derivative that is related to the X900 on your list.
I've been posting and arguing for months that once you get to 1080p60 AVCHD in any camera, the visible "sharpness, detail and resolution" of the resulting video depends more on the shooter, the light, exposure settings, white balance settings, the composition and the editing. By the time the files are processed by the camera, the computer and the display device, there is even less noticeable to the eye and brain.
When my HX9V was new, I took it with the SDT-750 to Maui and shot everything side by side for two weeks. I had intended to prove the more expensive one to be significantly superior. Once I put the files on a media player for my HD TV, I had to use the file names to tell what clips came from which camera.
Since then I pick from the three cameras based on the mission goal. Since most of my footage is related to travel or family, the RX100 is usually the one I grab. It is because I can shoot top quality stills and get video from a camera in my pocket.
My next major video and phot mission is a trip to Europe with my wife and friends where we will be driving from Germany to Italy and back. Luggage is required to be minimal and light. My plan is to take the HX9V set for optimal video. The RX100 will be set for optimal stills. I might take a monopod, but for sure a Gorrillapod. I'll carry the cameras in pouches on my belt for easy and quick access.
To your point in this thread, if I didn't like the HX9V so well, I would replace it with Panasonic ZS30 (TZ40 outside the USA) or a Sony HX50 as a video camera. My feeling is the Panasonic may be a little better in some ways but the Sony has more zoom.
(You left the ZS30/TZ40 off your list, but showed a photo example.)