Okay, last comparisons, I promise. I did these because I'm getting ready for a big sell-off - Fuji bodies and lenses, Sigma, Nikon, Pentax, accessories, etc., maybe Sony . . . Wanted to see the actual difference in IQ between RX2 and XP2 with a decent lens (23/2 in this case, to match the RX2 as closely as possible; don't have the 23 1.4). Trying to decide what to sell, what (if anything) to keep. The more I sell, the more $ I'll have to upgrade . . . One reason for the tests is that the XP2 is such a joy to shoot - I'd forgotten about that in the last year or two I've been with the RX2.
On these two images I tried to match the colors more closely. What I'm really interested in is the quality of the image: the roundness, detail, three-dimensionality (not as in-focus/out of focus, but in the look itself: how do the twigs look, the leaves, the near objects vs the far, etc.). Obviously the RX2 has more resolution, but I make more books and calendars than 30x20 prints, so how is the look itself? Is the XP2 too much of a sketch camera compared to the RX2 (or to an A7rIII if if I go that route)?
Anyway, one thing I'm noticing in these, especially the first one, is the DoF. The conventional wisdom is that APSC gives about a step more DoF, so I shot the Fuji at 5.6 and the Sony at 8 - figured that would give about the same DoF. Check the trees and power tower in the 1st pic - this is clearly not the case. The Fuji has much narrower DoF then the Sony. Another truism bites the dust for me.
Sony
Fuji
Sony
Fuji