X-pro1 vs x-a1 (or is it X-A1 vs X-pro1) using camera engine

Here is a quick comparison between the x-A1 and x-Pro1 using the camera engine

Settings: Vivid, 1/250. 5.6 ISO 200, DR100, 35mm lens

I purposely removed exif and I am not going to tell you which camera is x-a1 and which is xpro-1 (or is it xpro1 and x-a1?) you have to guess it by yourself.

I am not trying to prove one is superior to another because I am absolutely convinced the images are so close that in the long run output from those cameras can be practically interchangeable (that is you can easily pass x-a1 for x-pro1 if it breaks on assignment and nobody will know from the output)

I am using JPG by purpose again as I believe that each build-in-camera raw developer is the most optimized algorithm by the people who brought you the camera and I am not creating false impression by using a third party raw converter for x-trans that varies from company to company.

Judge by yourself

First a feel judgement on a resized down photo.

This is resized image from both, to see the overall color feel

Now pixel peeping of interesting areas in 1:1

Try to look at the yellow foliage, flat rendering of the car and the details of the fence

Look at the green rendering and the bricks, siding and roof

More of bricks and roof

Here is an extreme edge that proves the 35mm lens superiority, again look at the combination of small details and smooth surfaces

Hope this is useful.

In my view the x-a1 is one of the best-deal cameras of this year as it gives you xpro-1 power for very little money. If you sell the kit zoom for $250 on ebay, then you paid $350 for a camera that gives you high-end image output.