Given Ojgalli's caveat, and assuming an equally expressive musician per instrument, which instrument has the most room for expression? I would agree with Rcprince and say cello (and a close second probably goes to ptmconsulting's sax suggestion).
The big "problem" with piano (and therefore organ) IMO is that it is percussive only. Sax has the wind control (and reed control on top of that) which allows for continuity of varying types/degrees (with discrete note separation or note melding using "glissando"). It's in the same general register as the human voice, and covers a wide (3) octave range with a tone ranging from sweet to raunchy. However, sax is not percussive. Cello probably has a slightly wider range (usually 4 octaves) and notes are either discrete or completely run-together. Cello lacks the ability to get super "raunchy" the way saxophone can but the player can both 'push' and 'pull' the instrument for richness of tone, dynamic control is far better, vibrato is probably best in the orchestra, and a single player can be either Isaac Freeman (the bass for the Fairfield Four) or the sweetest, most delicate alto, AND everything in between.
rcprince, I completely agree about the Elgar and Bruch. Among expressive cello, I also like Peter Wispelwey's playing of Benjamin Britten Cello Suites on Channel Classics, Mario Brunello's odd compilation called "Alone" (tough to find in the US sometimes), Schelomo Rhapsody by Ernst Bloch (same dark vein as the Bruch), and Edgar Meyer's rendition of Bach Unaccompanied Cello Suites (on double bass), which is a something of a shocker if you find low notes stir the soul. The last stays high on my playlist no matter how many times I consciously try to "take a vacation" from it.