Thanks for reposting. At first I didn't see much of an issue, until I got to the crop at the end, doesn't look good that.
I hope you don't mind but I downloaded 3 of the file, 00023, 00025 and 00895. When viewing at 1:1 00023 from the mark II looks comparable, if not slightly better, than 00895 from the mark I to my eyes. 00025 however doesn't look good at all. At first I thought it was motion blur and that the train might have been. moving faster, but when I look at the rest of the image none of it looks good. I then thought it might be extreme diffraction but it was shot at F11 like the rest, so I'm not sure what was going off with it. Strangely, I got similar inconsistent results with an RX100-III and ended up returning that.
No problem to download the photos and have a look, I appreciate you doing so.I agree with your comments about the photos and the vehicle in 23/25 was completely static, it wasn't moving in either shot.I had taken some shots earlier in the day of a moving vehicle and the nose of the vehicle is soft but you can see the main body is sharp which is fine as the front is simply not in focus but the shot in 25 concerned me because it had a decent shutter speed, a reasonably large depth of field, a static subject and nothing to distract the AF.
The shot does look like a low shutter speed and the camera moved slightly during the shot but that's definitely not the case, it doesn't even look like one part is in perfect focus and the rest isn't either.If the camera did have image stabilisation I'd be wondering if it wasn't locking properly but that's definitely not the case.