Nektar GX-49 versus Roland A-49

I am an amateur keyboardist (funk/rock/jazz), intermediate level player, at best.

My main keyboard is a Roland FP-7f, which I love.  But I also want a portable, for lap use during mini work breaks, and for travel. 

I am not a fancy MIDI dude... all I want is basic keyboard functionality to drive basic Pianoteq.

I took delivery of both the Nektar GX-49 and the Roland A-49.  I expect to keep one, and return the other.  (I got the idea for a portable, and the Nektar in particular, on this forum)

Here are my thoughts.  If you have opinions, speak up!

Surprisingly, I am leaning towards the Nektar.  (I expected the Roland to dominate, because Roland is such a solid company).

What I like about the Nektar, in order of importance:
- both have identical sized keys (full width, and 5.5 inch length)
- the nektar's keys are taller.  When a white key is fully depressed, it goes down (at its near edge) a 1/2 inch.  the a-9 only goes down 1/4 inch.
- The Nektar might be a bit lighter touch but barely noticeable.  (Neither action comes close to my FP-7f).
- unfortunately, both pivot at the rear of the visible key, not deeper in the unit (unlike my FP-7f).  This means that both suffer the problem of poor leverage at the rear of the keys.  I don't think they differ in this amount of this flaw.
- the nektar key surfaces are matte (similar to FP-7f), rather than shiny and slippery on the A-49.
- i don't think I like A-49's rounded black keys, even though they describe it as an advantage
- controls are similar on both, including octave changing buttons.
- both are almost identical footprint
- Nektar is 5lb, while A-49 is 6lb
- the Nektar looks cooler:  matte instead of shiny.
- nektar costs $99 instead of $180 for A-49.
- on amazon, nektar offers a 3 year protection plan for $6 instead of $16 for 2 years for A-49.  Since this unit will travel, that is important.  It also mitigates the assumption that the Roland will be more durable.

steve200