Hermelin

I'm planning of just getting the 18 f/2, 35 f/2 and 56 f/1.2. 

I think you'll enjoy it.  Just learn to use the tools Fuji gives you and you'll be successful using the OVF.
 
Learning how to read the histogram and using it in conjunction with the EV meter (when in full manual) will help you nail your exposure...

I decided to get a used Xpro1. Should have it before Friday. 
I figure I'll sell it in Sept/Oct orso when I expect the X-T2 to be out. I might sell it for 100 bucks less orso but it will be worth it since I don't have a camera at all now (sold my canon gear 2 months ago).
 
If I enjoy the OVF a lot, I will get the XPRO2 instead. Will be interesting to see. But I think the bigger EVF and the flipscreen will be more suited for me.
 
Is 3.50 the latest firmware on the XPRO1 and the only firmware I need to update to?

Oh well. I bought a used xpro1 that should arrive here any day. If I end up loving the OVF, I'll get the Xpro2. If not. Then I'll get the XT2 when it arrived

i'm a new in this forum, so this is my first photo here.
i was in Bari, Italy last weekend, i took this photo with my X-E2, 35/1.4
 

San Francisco
X-Pro2, 23mm 1.4 R
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't know about any parallax error about the X-Pro 2 but to me the X-Pro 1 was like a mixed experience, i bought it mainly for the OVF, image quality, the amazing fuji lenses and the "retro" controls/dials, at first didn't noticed any terrible parallax error, then i started to compose "in more critical situations" with my 35 1.4  and started to notice it was there, at first was kinda frustrating because i don't liked the idea of using the EVF, so i started to practice at different distances with the camera mounted into a tripod and i saw the error is only present at the bottom and the right side of the image, top and left line of the OVF frame are very precise in my experience, nothing really bad if you aren't extremely obsessive, i just got used to it so i know when im taking pictures that there is going to be a little bit more at bottom/right, so i recompose based on what i learned, not distracting, it just becomes second nature, sometimes i just crop the extra bit without any problems or regrets, i just use EVF when the subject is at one arm of distance or less and that is like the 5% of the time, the other 95% i'm enjoying the OVF.


Important note!!! The OVF zooms in by default when i mount the XF35 1.4, i ALWAYS zoom out the OVF, that's maybe the reason why it is less precise to me, i just shoot that way because i like to see more context outside the frame, just to get more of the "rangefinderish experience" and that's the way i like it 

It would be fine when the X-T2 has 4K videos if 1) it does not make the camera more expensive, 2) it does not make the camera bulkier, and 3) it does not lead to reduced ergonomics for photo taking. Otherwise; leave the whatever video out, and focus on creating a high quality photo camera.
 
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Hoping for a compact 56 f/1.8 (or even 2 is fine) for half the price of the 56 f/1.2 

Try some Scotch...

Optically inferior? I wouldn't say so, but then again I don't have the 18-55 to compare and using the X-Pro2, I prefer primes anyways and appreciate the extra stop at f/2.
 
On the newer bodies, especially on the X-Pro2, it's really fast to focus so you shouldn't have any problems there.
 
It's a great all around lens if you're into the 28mm (35mm equivalent) focal length.
 
I was going to sell mine in favor of going even wider like the 14mm f/2.8 or even the 16mm f/1.4, but I decided to keep it after ordering my X-Pro2 and haven't regretted keeping it.
 
I brought 3 primes on a recent trip to Hong Kong.. the widest being the 18mm, and I also brought the 35mm f/2 for mid-range & 56mm f/1.2 just to get that extra reach.  I thought I'd use the 35mm f/2 as my go to lens for the majority of the trip, but I was wrong and ended up using the 18mm for probably at least 80% of the trip. It's just so versatile and in a dense city like Hong Kong with tall buildings and people in close quarters, the 18mm made a lot of sense.  Besides being able to capture more in 1 shot and help provide more context to the image, I found even if I had space to try and shoot further away from my intended subject using the 56mm or even the 35mm, the city was so packed with people all the time, there was always going to be somebody running into my shot a good lot of the time.. so, the 18mm forced me get in closer to my subject and was able to capture more unobstructed image than my other 2 lenses. A great thing about getting closer to subject is you can offset the subject in the composition so it wouldn't even seem like you could be aiming the camera at them, or rather framing them into the image as your intended subject, and take the shot with surprisingly little disturbance to the scene.
 
Sure, you could do this by setting the 18-55mm zoom to 18mm, but I also appreciate the extra stop of light and just that bit of extra shallower depth of field to help isolate the subject and nicely blur out the background (and foreground if you have elements to do so)... plus, the 18mm f2 is just that more smaller and discreet.
 
I love the images I got with the 18mm f2 and it's smaller size and lighter weight was great on the X-Pro2.. and  you can see your aperture settings as opposed to the 18-55mm zoom which is variable so it doesn't have that feature. Some say the edges aren't as sharp wide open, but for street photography, and even some bit of portraiture, I don't think having absolute sharpness from center to the edge is essential.
 
Really depends on the type of photography you plan to do.. the 18-55 is probably a very sensible choice as it covers so much and it does so fairly well.. But, if you prefer primes, the 18mm f/2 is not a bad way to go if you like the 28mm (35mm equivalent) focal length.  Great general purpose lens and for me surprisingly more used and useful than the 35mm or even 23mm fuji lenses, especially if you want to capture more, are in crowded situations, and can or need to get closer to your subject in one of the smallest and lightest lenses.
 
The 14mm f/2.8 is nice, but maybe a bit too wide for most occasions. I may have loved it for landscapes (cityscapes) or when I wanted a more immersive image where people were secondary to the environment. I think the 16mm f1.4 is nice, but considerably more expensive and heavier and bulkier.. but, I do like the results I'm seeing people get from it.. my next choice if money and size/weight is not an option.

Are the edges still soft at f/8?

Having also owned an X-T1, that's a definite yes. With an X-Pro2, people can see my smile so they're not as put off when I point the camera in their face.
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

3 years old pic taken with my then (now sold) x100s
 

Thanks everyone for feedback.
 
I'm looking to use this lens for street photography but also some landscape shots, but my landscape shots I will shot at f/8 I guess that even the corners should be reasonable sharp by then.
 
My head says that the 18-55 is the more reasonable lens because it seems to be optically better than the the 18 f/2. But I enjoy shoting primes, and I enjoy lightweight and discret. And f/2 vs f/2.8 is not huge, but it is a difference.
 
So I'm pretty sure I will go with this lens after all