Sluw

Here you can see it was a bit unsharp at 1/4 second Towering by Licht Sluw, on Flickr 1/30 Fungi in the forest #3 by Licht Sluw, on Flickr 1/15 Fungi in the forest #2 by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Strange, definitely return it for exchange, of course that's not normal. Never had that issue in temperatures up to 40 C

There are some things the f/2.0 does better over the 1.4 but I don't think that's better bokeh. The 1.4 bokeh looks much smoother, even at same aperture.

I agree with renes but the 56 f/1.2 and 90mm f/2.0 have the same smooth warm and nice rendering as well. So in my opinion you can add those as well.

Oh that one's still on my whishlist! I have the Samyang 12mm, which is great, but sometimes I think I prefer Fuji AF and build quality over the extra stop and wideangle.

You can call it magic or just larger aperture, optical corrected, smoother bokeh and a different color rendering. If you prefer the lens to be a bit smaller and WR you choose the f/2.0 if you prefer the things said before you choose the f/1.4. They can exist next to each other. Oh and since the firmware updates and faster focussing bodies the noise really is not too bad.

I can't say what to take but maybe you find this video interesting. Street Photography with Zack Arias in Marrakech, he seems to use the 27mm and 18-55mm (edit: he also seems to use the 56 and maybe even more) My preference would be: 14 (for astro), 35 1.4 (just love the bokeh and colour/rendering) or 56 18-135 And there's always space for that 27 :-) great for when you want a package without any protruding forms.

Yes I'd focus on the other aspects as well. AF is fine after all the updates. Since your camera isn't weather sealed the weather sealing isn't a very high priority although it might be interesting when buying a new camera. I think a weather sealed body with this lens is a great combo if you need it. I'd say go with the 1.4, it's rendering, extra light and better bokeh are great.

Do you have the latest firmware for camera and lens? Mine hunts some in low light but is super fast in good light on my X-E1, anything newer should work even better.

I don't say I recommend one over another and agree the 27 wouldn't be the final lens, if that even exists, but they're definitely different. 27 and 35 mm fov are a pretty big difference, personally I prefer de wider 27mm fov and the 34mm f/1.4 rendering (I have both 27 2.8 and 35 1.4). Next to that it's less than half the weight and length of the 35mm f/2.0, on x-e models it's like a x100 camera. Since you're looking for a portrait lens I'd consider the 90mm since it also gives you more reach for other purposes. I think it's a great focal length.

Golden village by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Depends on what you want to shoot and what your other wishes are (weight, aperture etc). Could either be a longer lens like the 90mm, 55-200 or 50-140 or a wide-angle like the 10-24, 14 or 16mm.

Palaia by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Do villagescapes count as well La Rocca by Licht Sluw, on Flickr Palaia, Italy

Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore by Licht Sluw, on Flickr Florence, Italy

I don't think it's more difficult, but it's definitely different. After shooting wideangle for a while you'll get used to it and "see" te different opportunities.

Since this article is from may and the 4.0 firmware is from end of June I think that was the final (big) FW update. Of course you can still expect fixes if needed but I guess no substantial update like that one anymore... What are you missing though?

It's definitely faster than on the x-pro1 but not "kids running around fast". What other lens(es) do you have? For example the 18-55 should do on the x-t2.

I can confirm that turning the camera off saves a lot of battery, such a big difference with an OVF/DSLR. And keep in mind that astrophotography consumes a lot of battery indeed.

Yes, that size definitely looks great. Still strange it's such a big difference with the image from Fuji. Let's hope it's the Swedish size!

I think the images on the frontpage are a bit wishful thinking, what do you think? Most 23mm (35) lenses are bigger than 35mm (50) lenses, even de Fujifilm 23mm f/1.4 is bigger than the 35 f/1.4. So if they're going to develop the new 23, 35 and 50 f/ 2.0 with the same philosophy it's probable the 23mm is going to be bigger like the "official" mock-ups show. Sidenote: it's interesting that most pancake lenses are 40mm (35mm equiv.) like the m43 20mm Panasonic, 27mm Fuji and loads of FF lenses. Also great quality lenses.

Brush strokes by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

The Zeiss 12mm is awesome. As other people said though, if you ever consider to buy an interchangeable lens Fuji you can also buy the Samyang 12mm which is as good (only without AF) and way cheaper.

The 18-55 is great for all the normal vacation stuff. If you want something else you could consider a wide-angle for architectural and wide landscape shots. If you're more interested in taking portraits the 56mm and 90mm create great images which are different than the 18-55. If you want more flexibility you can add a telezoom like the 55-200 (light, great option) the 50-140 (great for portraits and low light as well but heavy) or the 100-400 (biggest reach, heaviest). That said, you can have a great time and great photo's with the x-pro2 + 18-55 and x100t as well.

They're both great lenses in their price range anyway