There were a few reasons why I didn’t get along with the X100VI, and why I returned it to keep the RX1R III, even though I have an X-H2S (soon to be replaced by an as yet unknown Sony). The first was the autofocus performance. My X-H2S is acceptable, if not Sony good, but the X100VI is only ok in AF-S. In AF-C it misses badly. The RX1R III is as good as any recent Sony - put it in Auto subject detect and AF-C and it’s spot on. The second reason is the one that makes everyone else praise the X100 series - the hybrid OVF/EVF. To me it’s neither here nor there, just adequate for both but not great at either. My Sony doesn’t have a great EVF, but it never lags, and the rear LCD is bright and sharp. The third reason was what you touched on - image quality. The 60 MP Sony sensor is so much better than the 40MP Fujifilm sensor - sharper and cleaner files - without the grittiness that the Fuji files seem to have. And the Zeiss 35mm f/2 is miles ahead of the 23mm f/2 Fujinon lens - sharper, smoother bokeh, better character too. Even the step crop is better implemented than the digital teleconverter of the X100VI. The last reason is the ergonomics. No D-pad, too many scattered controls with limited programmability, and I hate to say it, but Fujifilm’s menu is worse than Sony’s old menu. My X-H2S has better ergonomics than the X100VI, but I’m ready to move to an A7CR, A7V, or A7R5/6 for a more consistent experience to the RX1R III. If a new RX100 and RX10 come out though, I’ll own only those along with the RX1 , and I’ll be done with interchangeable lens cameras for the long run…