greatwhite

I agree, the jpgs out of the X pro2 are superb and are the ones that I use most of all. They very rarely need adjusting much and if they do they seem to take it much better than previous cameras that I have owned.

I took a punt on this lens as it was on offer at Amazon new for £240 and I love using it. The results regarding colour and contrast are lovely even at f2. Yes it has a few optical flaws but most are caused by in camera corrections and can be bypassed by some raw converters. You get to know the flaws and work around them if you need to. I think that it is a great little lens and is on my Fuji camera a lot. Great results and nice definition for me anyway.

One minute he is knocking Leica then in another he is recommending them. No consistency so I just read his tests occasionally just for a laugh. If I had followed his advice I would have a very odd outfit. 

One minute he is knocking Leica then in another he is recommending them. No consistency so I just read his tests occasionally just for a laugh. If I had followed his advice I would have a very odd outfit. 

I shoot raw&jpg because it then gives me the best of both worlds. I have the negative (raw) and the print (jpg) at the same time. For smallish prints and putting on the web the jpg is fine and the jpg's from the X pro2 are a fairly big file so will take adjustments a lot better. For large prints, heavy crops, big dynamic range I use the raw as this gives the greatest flexibility. The X pro2 generates excellent jpg's and I tend to use those the most often but as like in the old film days it's always best to keep the negatives. The other advantage with shooting both is that I can make another jpg in camera with whatever film setting that I want and with settings to correct exposure or dynamic range, I often take a shot in Acros and then do a camera raw conversion in colour as well and end up with a negative (raw) a monochrome (jpg) and a colour (jpg). The flexibility is excellent and I always then have the negative (raw) to do what I want with in software.

Coming from Canon, I've spent the last decade shooting exclusively raw, because 'as any fool knows', it's *better* than jpeg.
 
I've spent the last decade sitting at my computer tweaking and poking the files to get them to something I'm happy with and then printing or exporting the files for display.
 
For the first 5 years, I loved working this way, it opened up new avenues, I could explore, it was fun, but for me, over the past 5 years, it's become a chore, a task, it's not fun anymore and I've noticed a significant drop in my social photography.
 
I've had an X100 on the side for ages, but because 'raw is better', despite shooting in raw + jpeg, I only imported the raw files to Lightroom and my heart would sink when I would see something I was happy with (the jpeg preview) disappear to be replaced by the 'adobe standard' raw - knowing that signaled the start of another set of slider bashing to get it back to something I liked, but you know. it had to be done because 'raw is better'.
 
Finally, with the XPro2, I've decided to reverse my workflow. I'll still shoot raw + jpeg, but I'll import the jpeg only into Lightroom. If (and it has not happened yet), I have a shot I need to push to the limits, I can go find the raw on the card and import it, if not, I'll delete them.
 
For me this means I'm 90% of my time on the camera and perhaps 10% on the computer, perhaps even less. It would have been pretty much the opposite when I started out in digital, but do you know what, neither approach is correct or incorrect, it's just a matter of what works for you, but I'm sure there are a lot of people who shoot raw, not because it works for them, but because it is what is 'expected'.
 
Back in the context of this thread, I'd say if you like the ACROS from the camera, use it. You can develop in camera from your raws and tweak the settings as needed - kind of like a mini version of Lightroom in the camera, with the Fuji magic built in. To my addled mind, the goal of photography is the visual impact of the product, not having a technically lossless version of it. 

Sorry. My favorite settings are whatever the subject matter and shooting environment dictate to give me the best possible results. The whole reason for buying a fully adjustable camera. Using someone else's settings can produce highly unpredictable results unless you know the circumstances and goal of the shooting situation.
 
At the most basic, I usually shoot aperture priority and auto-ISO in order to have the highest practical shutter speed under the circumstances. On a bright, sunny day, I will probably use f/5.6-f/8.0 for maximum resolution vs depth of field. In a living room at night, I will be shooting f/1.4-f/2.0 at ISO6400 in order to just get usable exposures. Even when shooting RAW, I generally do a manual white balance which makes for just fine tuning in Photoshop, not large corrections.
 
For more advanced settings, realize that for JPEGs all settings can be applied AFTER the exposure with the built-in RAW converter. You will get exactly the same results as if you applied them during the exposure. This means you can explore things like Highlight Tone or Shadow Tone and learn what each setting does under various circumstances. The original RAW exposure is not altered, and can be converted and compared as much as it pleases you. These settings in no way alter the RAW file. Once you fully understand the function of each setting, you can assess your shooting environment, make an educated guess, do a test shot or two to nail the image you are seeking. Test shots are always your friend, and feedback is immediate—the glory of digital photography. There never has been a more immediate and direct way to understand the whole photographic process.
 
As an alternative to custom settings, you can shoot RAW and apply fine-tuning with far greater sensitivity in processing. Even if JPEGs are the goal initially, it would be wise to shoot RAW+JPEG, so you will always have the richer originals to go back to as your skills progress. Either way, you have the advantage of being able to tune the exposure to the circumstances with the result of the image matching your vision of it.