XZ-1 wide angle better than XZ-2?

What do you all think about the comparative wide angle capability of the XZ-2 vs. its predecessor (XZ-1)?  This discussion of focal length equivalents from Pocket Lint's XZ-2 review says there is a change in but is the difference noticeable/meaningful?

An inspection of the XZ-2 spec sheet also suggests that its 1/1.7-inch sensor is slightly smaller than the XZ-1's claimed 1/1.63-inch sensor, yet the latest model packs in 20 per cent more resolution at 12-megapixels. Both XZ-series models show a "6-24mm" lens marking on their respective fronts which is an absolute truth, but it's the respective sensor sizes that generate each camera's equivalent view.

Some digging revealed it's the XZ-1's alleged sensor size that's the red herring; the original camera didn't utilise all of its size to produce its images, so the two XZ-series cameras both use approximately the same surface area to capture an image.

In response to our queries, Olympus says: "The lens of the XZ-1 and the XZ-2 is the same [but] the 35mm equivalent is of course not quite he same … as the XZ-2 sensor is a little bit smaller than the XZ-1['s] sensor. In reality focal length [equivalent] would be between 27 and 29mm."

...

A small gripe is that the lens is less wide-angle than its predecessor in our opinion. We'd rather see a 24mm or 25mm equivalent, not the 28/29mm version in this model. But then others will disagree, and the less-wide wide-angle does hold together image quality well.

--
Ben