DonSantos

You can't judge these.  The x-a1 image has motion blur which blurs out the fine details.  I can easily see the upper left to lower right diagonal blur happening

You are in luck.  RX10 will be announced soon and is sony's r1 replacement

Few snaps from this weekend.

Were these handheld?  #2 looks like it has some motion blur

You can continue paying the 200$ premium for a sensor without any gains

What happens when the op reveals that the left image is indeed from the x-a1?

Color noise is easy to get rid of without any added artifacts. For the luminance noise the x-a1 has a tiny bit more but it's also sharper.  In lightroom when I turn the noise reduction to only...

The left image looks better to me.  Better details and color retention.

comparing recently posted raw 3200 iso the x-a1 has without a doubt better color retention, contrast, sharpness!!!, and noise performance than the x-m1.

I downloaded rico's raws. At 3200 iso comparing color, sharpness and noise I think the x-a1 beats the x-m1 in all those categories!

Wow bayer looks so much better

492$ on Amazon. I had the purchase lined up and also with a 50$ extra discount. I just couldn't make myself hit "place order"

Two observations: 1.  x-a1 is sharper. 2.  x-a1 has less color and chroma noise. I took a look at the raw it's very sharp at 6400 and takes noise reduction and extra sharpening very well.   I...

According to the dpreview raw test low iso em-5 looks sharper but super high iso em-1 take a small lead

From the 6400 raw I don't see any evidence of smearing.  The grain is well defined in a pixel.  The just isn't a lot of noise.  I can't say they don't iso cheat though.  That remains to be seen.

Lol. Nuff said.

I can't say anything about that jpeg but the raw is killer for 6400.(without any noise reduction)

Also...  according to this dpreview graph the m-x1 destroys the omd.

laughable at best

In one fell swoop fuji has discredited the benefits of their xtrans. What will they do now?