DougieB

Hi
I have the 60 mm, it's very sharp but not 1 to 1 macro, so I bought an addaptor ring from Amazon for £40 and use my tamron 90 Nikon fit macro. This gets me true macro of 1 to 1
When the 120 mm macro is launched I will trade in my Fuji 60 and the tamron, I know it will be a much better lens.
I also have the extension tubes, and find the lens that works best with these is the 18-55 because I can use zoom to focus,,,, works well for me.
Let me know
Billy

As I have shown, a lot of lenses were produced by lens makers ( not internet commentators, but actual lens makers) such as nikon, pentax, zeiss,olympus, and were given the predicate macro and micro but didn’t get to 1:1 reproduction ratio.
 
I suppose that one might agree that lens makers know a few things more about macro lenses than dictionaries compilers whose task is to register the use of language ( I have been studying languages & linguistics and I am aware of how a dictionary is compiled)  but don’t make the things called macro and haven’t given them their name.
 
So, if a language myth takes a foothold a dictionary will report it as it is used, even badly. 
 
However the lens makers have a different opinion on these terms.
 
Some define and have historically defined as macro and micro ( although micro, linguistically, should indicate that the reproduction ratio should be greater than life-size so with an actual magnification of the subject) many lenses which reproduce lifesize and sometimes less than that.
 
 
 
A substantial amount of them in this list is half size ( and actually there will be more if the would include some older lenses for example it lists the pentax 100mm f2.8 but not the earlier f4 ( which I own and use), the same is also true fro the early versions Tamron 90mm and Vivitar 90mm, also half size but not listed among these lenses below)
 
 
From Wikipedia (a partial list of lenses not including many with reproduction ratios lesser than 1:1, but nevertheless apt to show that there are several Macro lenses which didn’t get any furthere than 1:2  and some a lot less than that , such as the Schneider Makro or the Kern macro switar)
 
Lens focal length Reproduction Ratio Closest Focus Canon EF Compact f/2.5 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 6in.
Canon EF-S f/2.8 USM 60mm 1:1 (life size) 8in.
Canon MP-E f/2.8 1-5x 65mm 5:1 (life size) 7in.
Canon EF f/2.8 USM 100mm 1:1 (life size) 12in.
Canon EF f/2.8L IS USM 100mm 1:1 (life size) 12in.
Canon EF f/3.5L USM 180mm 1:1 (life size) 19in.
Fujifilm XF60mmF2.4 R Macro [16] 60mm 1:2 (half life size) 10.5in.
Nikon AF-S DX f/2.8G 40mm 1:1 (life size) 6.4in.
Nikon Micro-Nikkor f/2.8 55mm 1:2 (half life size) 10.8in.
Nikon AF Nikkor f/2.8D 60mm 1:1 (life size) 8.75in.
Nikon AF-S Nikkor f/2.8G ED 60mm 1:1 (life size) 6in.
Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor f/3.5G ED VR 85mm 1:1 (life size) 9in.
Nikon Micro-Nikkor f/2.8 105mm 1:2 (half life size) 16.08in.
Nikon AF-S VR Nikkor f/2.8G IF-ED 105mm 1:1 (life size) 12in.
Nikon AF Nikkor f/4D IF-ED 200mm 1:1 (life size) 20in.
Nikon PC-E Nikkor f/2.8D ED 45mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.9in.
Nikon PC-E Nikkor f/2.8D 85mm 1:2 (half life size) 15in.
Olympus Zuiko Macro f/2 90mm 1:2 (half life size) 15.7in.
Olympus Zuiko Macro f/2 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.6in.
Olympus Zuiko Macro f/3.5 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.1in.
Olympus ED-Zuiko Macro f/2 50mm 1:1 (35mm eqv. 2x life size) 9.5in.
Olympus m.Zuiko Macro f/2.8 60mm 1:2 (35mm eqv. life size) 7.5in.
Pentax DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited 35mm 1:1 (life size) 5.4in.
Pentax D-FA 50mm f/2.8 Macro 50mm 1:1 (life size) 7.67in.
Pentax D-FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR 100mm 1:1 (life size) 9.9in.
Schneider Kreuznach PC-TS MAKRO-SYMMAR 4.5/90 HM[17] 90mm 1:4 (quarter life size) 22.8in. ( 1/4 size......!)
Sigma 50mm F2.8 EX DG Macro[18] 50mm 1:1 (life size) 5.3in.
Sigma 70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro[19] 70mm 1:1 (life size) 10.1in.
Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro[20] 105mm 1:1 (life size) 12.3in.
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO Macro[21] 150mm 1:1 (life size) 15in.
Sigma APO Macro 180mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM[22] 180mm 1:1 (life size) 18.6in.
Sony DT 30mm f/2.8 Macro Lens 30mm 1:1 (life size) 4.8in.
Sony 50mm f/2.8 Macro Lens 50mm 1:1 (life size) 7.8in.
Sony 100mm f/2.8 Macro Lens 100mm 1:1 (life size) 14.4in.
Tamron SP 60mm f/2.0 Di II 1:1 Macro[23] 60mm 1:1 (life size) 9.1in.
Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di 1:1 Macro[24] 90mm 1:1 (life size) 11.4in.
Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro[25] 90mm 1:1 (life size) 11.8in. 
Tamron SP 180mm f/3.5 Di 1:1 Macro[26] 180mm 1:1 (life size) 18.5in.
Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/50[27] 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.6in.
Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100[28] 100mm 1:2 (half life size) 17.6in.
[29] [30] [31] [32]
 
To these I would certainly add the Alpa Kern Macro Switar with only 1:3 reproduction ratio, but, called macro, nonetheless.
Pentax 100mm f4 Macro ( half life size)
Micro Nikkor ( half life size)
 
 
 
What do they ( Kern, Pentax and Nikkon) know about lenses?

While I do agree with your point about macro in general, I have also read a lot about the 60mm not working too well with the close focus adaptors. 
I personally own the Zeiss 50mm Touit Macro and it is an absolutely tremendous lens. The only thing I wish it had is a longer focal length. But as I rarely ever need 1:1 or even 1:2 it's okay. I'm selling it right now, but that's not because of the capabilities, more because I don't use it enough.

I, for one, want an AF-joystick exactly where my thumb is, on the back of the camera. Oh, and global shutter (progressive readout) for stills.

Agreed with Phil. I think the X-T line might actually cater more to pros than the x-pro, with features like a battery grip that make holding giant lenses like the 50-140 a whole lot easier. 

With all the flagship talk, it makes me wonder... Does the X-Pro really have to be the flagship model? Can't it be part of the flagship lineup with the top X-T model?
 
It's not like the X-Pro is all-around better, like comparing the 1DX to the 5D. The X-T is obviously popular enough that many people prefer it over the X-Pro, and they're two completely different cameras geared towards different types of photographer.