Dis

Don't know about Capture One but Lightroom remembers image aspect ratio but don't apply film simulation settings. The last could be probably done in purpose as a default setting is Adobe Standard.

For a week in the mountains I take single X-T1 + 18-135 and that's it. I want to stay light and don't want to waste time swapping lenses so 18-135 is ideal for such purpose.

I don't understand how this suddenly became a comparison between the 18-135 and the 16-55.
 
Both lenses were made with different ideologies.
 
The18-135 is an all prupose lense that will do good in most situations, it's a lens of comprise. You trade quality for practicability. True they are better options if you need to go far, but would any of them allow you to go from wide to close up without changing lenses ? Or take that shot at 135mm at 1/10 of a sec handheld ? Not many can do that, so yes, they had to cut some coners here and there and IQ took a bite. 
 
The 16-55 on the hand was made to be a high IQ zoom lens, no VR because it would have made it even bulkier than what it is now, but still has WR to please a certain crowd. It's more targeted at the "Pros".
 
Both lenses are very good in their own expertise area.
 
The right tool for the right job.

The bokeh on the sample pics I saw for the 50-140 put me off buying it. Some of the examples made me feel dizzy. I had the money in the bank ready to go.
 
I have just got the 90mm, the images really pop out the frame and I can really see how this is going to become my 2nd favourite lens (after the 35mm)

Manila street portrait. Guillermo Navarro.

I'd say it's Leica M3
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2011/03/5494289480_c6136fefc1_b.jpeg

That's an interesting opinion. Unfortunately I don't have an APD. It would be great if one of our forum members that has both STD and APD could prove or disprove your observation. This could be your sample particularity.

That's one of the reasons I don't get reviews on gear from only a single sources, I try to get as much possible from pretty much every single corners and niches I can find.
 
Globally it allows me to build a better idea of what the camera/lens/gear is capable of and also why for some, that super great feature is actually a downside or vice versa.

This was a very pleasant experience in dealing with Fuji repair. Total turnaround time (including shipping) was ten days. Fuji replaced the aperture assembly and the mount. In my opinion the aperture is no longer as loose as it was.
 
Omer...

This lens is OK optically. It's light and built better than other consumer plastic lenses. Nevertheless it still feels cheap after XF lenses. The AF is silent and quite slow but so is 55-200's one. This lens extends a lot while zooming so it's a real air pump. One can feel the strong air flow through the viewfinder. Thus in theory this lens can push dust to the sensor due to the lack of sealing. I haven't seen this in practice though. To me the most serious flaw is the lack of controls. I don't like fuji cameras rear and front dials so I rarely use them when shooting other lenses but with 50-230 front dial is the only way to adjust the aperture. There are two possibilities to switch from manual aperture to automatic. You weather have to go all way down to f/22 with the front wheel wich is quite slow way. Or you can waste one Fn button for this. The OIS switch is even worse as the only way to change it is burried in the menues. In the end 18-135 has replaced my 50-230 as its marginally heavier but can be used as a single lens when I need to stay really light which is quite often requirement for shoots I use slow zoom lenses. I found out that I need 135-230 reach quite rarely so it's OK for me. 18-135 allows to shoot faster thanks to it's controls and much snappier AF. It also adds weather sealing unlike 50-200.
The botton line: this lens is quite good and cheap but you have to be sure you're OK with really slow shooting and plastic feeling.

Pancake, 100g, internal zoom, OIS, WR, AUTO-WORLDS-BEST-PHOTO button.

The Jpeg's are good, but it's my understanding that RAW shooters don't shoot RAW because the Jpeg's are bad.  They shoot RAW because they don't want the compression, and the settings locked into the file like the Jpeg's are.
 
Or am I just missing something?

My Impressions after the first wedding with Fuji was exactly the same. I turned back to DSLRs immediately for several months. All this time I was shooting only static and home scenes with Fuji. As a result my total shooting style changed drastically. What's important, my photos got better. In the end I've tried to shoot weddings with Fuji again and never got back to DSLRs again. Weddings can be shot by Fuji As effective as with DSLRs. One has just to adapt to all the nuances of Mirrorless. Now with new FW, the switch from DSLRs to Fuji will be more easy.

That's strange to compare 56 vs 90. I need both for different purposes. So choose the focal length first and consider 56 STD (unofficial standard version name) vs 56 APD or 90 vs 85. Better both). IMO even 56mm STD and APD versions are different purpose. If I have a load of money I would have both. APD is better for stills outdoors in daylight while STD is better for fast shooting and low light scenarios. I have STD due to it's versatility.
 
For long reach I use Nikkor 105/2 DC. It's great lens but I have hard times not to waste my frames with out of focus pictures as the DOF is really shallow. With an AF lens I usually refocus quite often to be sure to be in focus all the time but with MF lens I forget to do this sometimes. Moreover even though my X-T1 features large EVF and great MF assistance, it's not that easy to focus that precisely. X-Pro1 is even worse due to worse MF assistance and smaller EVF. Thus with a long fast lens like these I would recommend to take an XF 90/2 due to it's AF ability. I've tried it in a local store and have seen many samples and I'm sure it's a fantastic lens. I can't sell my Nikkor until march 2016 but as soon as this date comes I'll switch to 90/2 immediately.
 
One guy have told me that he prefers Rokinon/Samyang 85mm T/1.5 Nikon F mount cinema lens over f/1.4 version for Fuji-X via an adapter due to it's superior ergonomics. Personally I can tell nothing about this lens but if you choose to go MF you should probably consider this option too.

My Impressions after the first wedding with Fuji was exactly the same. I turned back to DSLRs immediately for several months. All this time I was shooting only static and home scenes with Fuji. As a result my total shooting style changed drastically. What's important, my photos got better. In the end I've tried to shoot weddings with Fuji again and never got back to DSLRs again. Weddings can be shot by Fuji As effective as with DSLRs. One has just to adapt to all the nuances of Mirrorless. Now with new FW, the switch from DSLRs to Fuji will be more easy.

I'd say it's fast at EV3.5. It's slow but don't hunt up to EV0. It fails after EV-2. Tested on 56/1.2

It'd be more correct to say thay auto iso value isn't displayed until shutter button half pressed. Only maximum auto iso value displayed before half-press. I find it little bit annoying too. But I was waiting for this feature for quite a long time so I'm not complaining.

Nevertheless you won't take too many primes for travelling and you don't have time to swap lenses in street photography. I'd say 35 is unnecessary if you already have 23 and 50. When I need two fast primes for fast photography I take X100S and XF 56 

Fuji had done a very logical sequence of lens releases. The X-Pro1 and the initial three lenses were the classic photojournalist's kit. It made the X-cameras immediately viable. Since then, they have added a "kit lens" beyond the quality of any other on the market. A few very useful zooms followed by high-end zooms in comparable fields of view with Canikon. Amazing in so few years. With the exception of super-telephotos, we are well covered. Now it is a matter of more specialized lenses filling in the perceived gaps. 

We have a "normal" lens and it is superb. An f/2.0 is a nice bonus for shooters looking for a lighter, cheaper, more compact lens. A few years down the line, a f/0.9 might find a few sales. The f/1.4 is a pro-am workhorse. A focal length of 135mm is not all that popular, but enough are being sold to keep them in production. Fuji's 90mm has the same FOV and is apparently a superb lens. I have shot with 135mm lenses on Niko and have a 90mm Canon Serenar for the X-Pro1 in a Leica screw mount. Not good for Fuji and not a focal length I favour. However, it is a good lens beyond the basics.

Happily, the X-mount is being served by other lens makers. Nice to have Zeiss on board and the Samyang family. I recently traveled with the Samyang 8mm, using it as a super-wide rather than capitalizing on its distortion, and came off with some spectacular shots. In the history of photography, the f/2.0 will find quite a bit of favour, but it is certainly in the third or fourth wave of lenses.

What's the point of having faster wide end? At shorter focal lengths one can shoot with longer shutter speeds. It's the tele end that need to be faster but nobody does that. Constant aperture lets you lock ISO and SS in constant lighting. That's important for lot's of people. 

Can you please provide some information about the nice bag?

My secret is to carry several cameras with different primes. I use two for now but I really need three. I have had to borrow Nikon D750+20/1.8 from my friend for the weddings I can't do with two cameras and 10-24/4 instead of 16/1.4 (it's just about to arrive). I'm waiting for X-Pro2 but as it's postponed again it looks like I have to get another body now.
Every shooting scene takes it's own combination of lenses but the short answer is:
For standard size rooms
XF 16/1.4
X100s
XF 56/1.2
 
For halls
XF 16/1.4
X100s+TCL
XF 90/2 (I use Nikkor 105/2 DC while I'm saving for 90/2)

If Fujifilm reads these forums.  I love my X100s to bits, but when it's raining I get  .  Shooting in rain is one of my favorite things to do.  But it's a pain to have to wrap my X100s in a plastic bag and tape...  

You could get overwhelmed if you attempt to use all of these features but you don't have to use them so you don't need to create the confusion that you're talking about.   Instead just use what you want.   Nothing has changed with the focus modes or the drive modes and it's easy enough to add the tracking modes to the Q menu or to a function button.   If you want to use face detection or ES then you are adding a layer of complexity but I consider ES to be a special situation feature so I don't know how often you need to mix that with the tracking modes.    And I'm not sure how effective face detection is anyway so maybe it isn't much of a factor.
 
For me I have tracking modes, shutter type and face detection next to each other in Q menu.   Shutter type stays on MS and face detection stays off almost all of the time so I'm just changing drive mode and focus mode as always and then tracking mode for the times I need zone focusing.   It's really easy to manage and not a big change for me and on the rare occasion that I need ES or face detection I'm in AF-S single point anyway.   

For the sake of a complete system:
 
70mm f/1.4,1.8.2.0 (something like that), maybe macro 1:1
Slower 16/23/56mm options with 2.0 or 2.8
16-70 or 80 with constant f/4 and OIS
16 tilt/shift f/4
Telephoto primes: 200 2.8, 267 2.8, 400 4.0, something like that
 
I think cheaper/slower primes with traditional focal lengths should be added next, the 35/2 WR being the starting point.