I'd be really interested in what other people thought about the sharpenss of Fujis when compared to a FF DSLR.
I was Nikon FF for a few years (D600 then D750), and Sony a7 /RX1 before my X-T1.
In terms of usability both the a7, RX1 and X-T1 have all had much more consistent AF for relatively still objects, contributing to a perception of better sharpness. My X-T1 has an uncanny ability to lock onto precisely what I want, I never felt that was the case with my FF DSLR unless using Live View, despite many hours tinkering with Micro Adjustment. I love that I don't need to worry about that with the Fuji.
What I do find interesting is that in terms of the 'feel' of images, Fuji X can often get amazingly close to FF, particularly in terms of the '3D pop'. i.e. the Fuji X 23mm 1.4 shouldn't by rights render similar to the FF 35mm 1.4 wide open, but it often does. Equivalence junkies will argue the APS-C 56mm 1.2 is like an 85mm 1.8 on FF, but there is no way the 85 on my old FF would separate subjects from backgrounds quite like the 56 does.
Overall my images feel sharper now than when I used FF DSLR, whether that was due to user error or poor calibration before, who knows, ultimately that doesn't matter because out of the box my Fuji (and every single lens) gives me sharp images straight out of the camera.
I don't miss FF, which I'm really surprised by. I do miss the Sony a mount Zeiss 135mm 1.8, I've never used a lens that comes as close to perfection as that and it's my favourite focal length, but overall the Fuji lens line up is pretty extraordinary in terms of how consistently exceptional they are.
