Back in January when this argument blew up in the first place I took Zombie's original screen captures and put them side by side(instead of over and above--as Zombie originally presented them).
Now without any bias(even though I own the Sony and not the JVC) and being objective.... I have to categorically say that the Sony(on the left) gives the sharper picture(if that is the factor that one is most interested in)....at this level of magnification:
I circled Cruise's wrinkle to emphasize how much more pronounced and sharper looking it is on the 1100/1000es.
Putting the sharpness aside I do personally prefer the color tonality of the JVC in this instance.
The 1000es does have both Cinema 1 mode(and my new personal favorite---Digital Cinema Mode) which express the same(or a similar) color tonality to that JVC shot.
So if Zombie is reading!......if he has(or ever took) a screen shot of the 1000/1100es in Cinema 1 Mode of the very same Tom Cruise picture, then that would be a better comparison to make with the JVC rs600 in this instance.
Seegs says there is still posterization on the 1000/1100 even in these modes(Cinema 1 and Digital Cinema) and I don't doubt him...
It is far less pronounced in these modes(Cinema 1 & Digital Cinema)and not visible from normal seating distances ,unlike the posterization in Reference Mode, which most certainly is.
And my guess is that it won't be visible(or far less visible) in the screen shots that Zombie took(if he ever did take them)......at this level of magnification.
I don't want to have to buy an RS600 myself just to prove this point(when I could buy a 65 inch OLED with all the HDR bells and whistles)for roughly the same amount of money(here in the UK)!
What is the JVC like with E-shift turned off on the very same Tom Cruise shot.
If Zombie could show that too.....that would be interesting to see.