The grass is always greener on the other side.
The XTrans is something I could have lived without, for me it's more of a nuisance than it's worth it, and the sensor it's not the best compared with top APS-C. Better than my D90 but not by much.
Have read comments by others as well as you, regarding the XTrans Sensor.
Some say it gives excellent detail, others say not so much?
Is the complaints due to real limitations of the sensor or is it more due to only a few raw converters can bring out the best from the XtTrans Raw files? Understand that Adobe is getting better but far from the best raw converted for Xtrans?
For me never warmed up to adobe Raw coveter, have not used lightroom.
For Canon used their own Raw converter for basic converting and detail work in photoshop from Tiff files.
Only other converter I felt at ease using was a free software called Raw Converter, which was very good, to bad they sold out to Adobe I believe...
At the moment don't have a real set workflow been pretty much out of photography the last 5 years as far as real work and printing, so perhaps Id not be as bothered once I purchased a good Raw converter for Xtran files. In the past I have used for sharping my files Photokit Sharpener for capture and selective sharping and output sharping and printing from Qimage. Anyone use either or both of the above anymore? I really like the perceived automation of sharpening.Let software picked the best capture base on selective settings, let software pick the best output based on print size, paper, ect
With me doing selective sharpening to make certain areas pop. I take pride in good prints I can matt and frame, but don't claim to be up or good at all the fine points of enhancing images.
I likely work harder to get a print I like than most, lack of skill, but bulldog determination...
Dave