No. But I rarely use the .5 seat for anything other than a kneepad. I couldn't finish a hunt sitting on the metal .5 seat.
I'm not downplaying the comfort of the JX3. It's pretty awesome. Why I've kept it.
The JX3 is superior in two ways, imo. 1. NO knee pressure. 2. You can completely unweight feet, resting them on ROS (also possible on a stand with foot rest).
But "not close", I disagree with that. I'm really comfortable in my saddle with the .5. Leaning or sitting. And I think having the option to fully stand adds a comfort position that most JX3 setups aren't going to offer. I've spent some time standing and leaning shoulder or back to the tree and it can be less fatiguing on the neck and/or less movement inducing than trying to cover blind spots in the JX3.
Anyway, both great choices imo.
Maybe we're operating off of different priors.
I'm making the assumption that very few folks would be considering dropping 500 bucks for a hybrid because they're mildly uncomfortable while sitting in their soft saddle.
I'm making the assumption that very few folks who are quite comfortable standing and leaning, regardless of the system they choose, wouldn't be interested in a hybrid, where it's primary use mode and purpose is to sit comfortably.
I'm making the assumption that very few folks who are mildly uncomfortable using a hang-on stand as a hang-on stand would be considering dropping 500.00 for a hybrid.
I'm operating on the assumption that most folks using the above systems, who are inquiring about a hybrid, are doing so because they are at least somewhere close to 500.00 worth of uncomfortable. Or carrying 13lbs worth of uncomfortable. Or listening to me babble on worth of uncomfortable.
Given that context, and taking my personal experience into account, the difference between the hybrid and the 3 situations described above, is material.
There's nothing about the hybrid itself that prevents you from standing like you would in any soft saddle. You'd be adding a platform, and thus increasing the weight of your entire system, to something equivalent or heavier than a hang-on/sticks or climber. Again, I make an assumption that if standing is important, folks wouldn't even consider spending 500.00 on a hybrid whose primary focus is sitting comfortably.
I often say that all climbing methods are about the same when you consider all aspects of using them - price, effort to research, effort to practice, storing them, packing them to hunt, carrying them to hunt, unpacking them to climb, climbing up, climbing down, packing them to leave, carrying them out. In terms of time/money/effort/suffering, they're all about the same. The only one that seems slightly out of this box for me is bolts. But part of that is personal, and the difference is slight.
I view "things you sit in, in a tree" the same way. When you weigh all that goes into it, they're more similar than not. And again, I view the hybrid the same as bolts - slightly out of that box. But when comparing in a more narrow view, based on the above priors, and specifically in regards to comfort(ability to sit still longer, and over time), it really does stand out. That's where my "not close" comes from.
Of course, if you're very comfortable in a soft saddle, a hybrid would not be significantly more comfortable. My assumption is that anyone researching a hybrid isn't very comfortable. I also have a suspicion that many more people are not as comfortable as they tell themselves, but that is a different subject!