Exposure on the first was the same on the A57 and Fuji but I pulled up the shadows a bit more as the A57 is giving more exposure per set ISO value. If anything that puts the Fuji at a disadvantage
I used the A77 on the second one as I felt it's got slightly (and I use the word slightly) better DR than the A57 but the differences are not big between the A57 and A77 I did extensive tests on both and again they meter a bit differently and matching real exposures at high ISO there isn't a lot of difference it's just the A77 by default gives even less exposure than the A57 and thus many (including myself) came to the conclusion the high ISO sucks, it does if you let it underexpose at high ISO and then pull it up in post (though you can get decent lower res shots) Both the A57 and A77 are decent enough at high ISO "if" you give them a "Nikon" style aggressive metering ie good exposure.
Details wise I saw little difference between the A57 and A77 a slight nod at times to the A77 but it's not a major one. I'll probably wait for the A mount to Fuji X adapter to turn up then I can use the same lenses to see what's going on there.
All 3 meter differently even the X10 I have will again meter different to all the other cameras, ditto on the old Dynax 5d's I still have. It's not that easy to determine what models have accurate ISO settings most fudge them to a degree, I suspect Fuji are more than most (though possibly not as much as Olympus are) DxO didn't test the Xtrans sensor (and they didn't properly test the EXR sensor either in half res) I don't doubt their ISO measurements are fairly good even if some of the other tests are a bit open to debate.
So far the only thing I can say about the Xtrans sensor is that it does seem to have a very very good latitude in raw both highlights and shadows, not that I am in any way unhappy with the Sony sensor it's good all round (bar chroma noise) likewise I have a lot of time for the X10's EXR sensor. I tested the Fuji X20 and I wasn't overly impressed the DR was not a patch on the X10 Xtrans doesn't seem to work well in the smaller sensor format I got shot of the X20 fairly quickly as the X10 suits my needs far better. But APS-C wise so far it's pretty impressive even taking into account the iffy ISO settings (no base ISO of 100 and raw stops at 6400 for some reason)
I should try to do a bit DR "shootout" but from field use I can say the EXR on the X10 has by far better DR than any other sensor in a compact camera not even remotely close on that, if shot in 6mp EXR raw you have frankly barmy DR available and I think it's close to the Sony DR wise it might even beat it out I have to run them head to head. Xtrans wise I need more field time with it some say it mushes up details in landscape green areas, hard to say on that one at the moment. It might be the best APS-C sensor out there, I have to play with it more to see what's happening. None of this makes the Sony's bad, frankly after using some Canon DSLR's I'd say both of the other sensors humiliate Canon at least in terms of DR, I'm not ready to call the Xtrans "as good as a full frame sensor" but I will test it some more and use it at an event on Friday, nothing really beats some real world stuff for testing.
I'm not about to invest in a massive bunch of Fuji stuff either there are some disadvantages for certain flash system isn't really there, no IBIS..cost of "some" of the Fuji lenses is high (some are OK price wise some are pricey enough)