deva

a 75-85 Micro that is 1:1 will be fine with me. I likely would prefer that to the 120 anyway... I just hope it is not too far away The other lenses I would like are a 70 1.4 and a 16-80 f4 OIS

Not for me... I was spending too much time switching lenses... particularly because I have been enjoying shooting the Fuji primes so much. I needed a second body.

I needed 2 bodies and wanted the X-Pro2 more than a second X-T1. I'm glad I made the choice I did. When the X-T2 comes out, I will sell the X-T1, get an X-T2 and still have 2 bodies. I'm also exploring the use of the OVF and deciding if it adds something I value. I've never used a rangefinder before so it is something new and interesting to explore. It is too early to offer my experience with the OVF. In a few months I may have a conclusion. Worst happens I also sell the X-Pro2 and get 2 X-T2's... I find switching between the X-T1 and X-Pro2 not as smooth as I would like. The controls are bit too different

I purchased the X-Pro2 because the X-T2 was not yet available.

holding down the playback button switches cards

I want the X-T2 to stay light as well... however, there is some room there. The current X-T1 is almost half the weight of a Nikon D500 or D7200. And the closest Nikon equals to the Fuji lenses are almost all heavier... sometimes significantly. Nikon also does not have much in the way of DX primes. Nothing like the Fuji 16 1.4. The Fuji 35 1.4 weighs less than the Nikon 35 1.8. Fuji also offers some compact lenses like the 18 and 27 with no Nikon equal. Canon also has almost no APS-C primes so a lot of their Fuji equivalents in FF are much heavier.

The OIS in this lens is remarkably good. I shot 5-6 images handheld at night at 140 @ 1/15 and they are sharp. I'm not used to the whirring sound it makes yet. Nor the little clunk turning on and off. Noisiest lens I've had and accentuated by a very quiet night here... but the performance is very impressive...

The telephoto end is my least used. I just purchased the 50-140 and it feels like a bit of an indulgence since I have the 18-135. I have 30 days from purchase to return the 50-140 (or of course sell it past that). I'll see if it is useful enough to justify it.

that was my solution... but then I primarily shoot wide angle, a mix of day and night and use both frequently. for night on the street, the fast primes are the only real option for me. I use the 23, 16 and 56 (most used first) and am often shooting 3200 iso @ f1.4 in order to keep a shutter speed that freezes the action. in other situations the 10-24 is fantastic... it is one of my favorite lenses.

I tend to think the existing X-T1 tilt screen is stronger than an articulating screen. Not sure if that is accurate or meaningful. I feel happy with the X-T1 screen and it seems strong and harder to break. So keeping it the same for the X-T2 works fine for me.

most of my bags are black, but I wish they weren't for exactly the reason you state.

I just purchased the Tenba Cooper 15. It has velcro that can be quiet... pull down then out and no velcro noise!... yes! It is also big enough to carry my 2 Fuji bodies and all 7 lenses. Plus it can hold a 15" laptop. Pull out the camera insert and it works well just for the laptop. i purchased it as a replacement for a similar sized bag I have but which is just a bit narrow to comfortably have the camera body width wise... The bag I use the most is a small 'old school' squarish camera bag just big enough to hold 2 fuji bodies with smaller lenses plus a 3rd small lens and a few spare batteries. The bag itself weighs nothing, looks like crap, is not 'stylish' at all and attracts no attention. I got it at a garage sale for a buck. With one Fuji body and 3 primes (16, 23, 56) I can carry that around on my shoulder all day and never notice the weight... nor be noticed. I have 6 bags altogether... 2 of which serve only as places to store gear. One is a backpack which I never use cause it is not so good for fast access.

I was out the other day with the X-Pro2 shooting cars as they were coming towards me and going away. Most shots were in focus. Different cameras function in different ways. It requires workflow adjustment from the photographer. In your example, lift your finger from the shutter and zoom then shoot again. It is not that you couldn't zoom wider, it is that you were adhering to a workflow developed with another camera and not working with the camera in hand according to its capabilities. No offense meant and of course it is entirely up to you to do it however you wish and use which camera you wish. I'm just saying that the X-Pro2 can give excellent results, but one would have to work with it, not try to make it be something else. And there is nothing wrong with someone just using a pro DSLR instead.

It says that, but it only appears to adjust saturation, not hue/color balance

Thanks for the explanation!

The EVF blackout on the X-Pro2 is much faster than the X-T1 and almost as fast as my Nikon (which I turned on today for the first time in over a year). There is no inherent tracking inferiority to an EVF compared to a DSLR. In fact, the mirror demands a physical blackout and it wont be long before the EVF's have no blackout and a refresh rate high enough that there is no downside (besides battery use).

I noticed that when reviewing images, I can zoom in much more on JPG's than on RAW images. Is there some technical reason for this?

Also, there are lots of situations where your feet cannot get somewhere. For example, shooting in a crowd and wanting to get a bit of elevation and the only quick vantage point is on top of a newspaper box. Then some zoom matters more than anything else for framing the photo. Ultimate image quality doesn't matter in the slightest if one cannot get an effective composition in the first place. The 10-24 is an awesome lens. For shooting events, parades, protests, and other large gatherings it is way more versatile than a single prime. With the 10-14 range you can squeeze into little spaces between groups of people and still capture the whole group or banner etc. Then you can zoom out to 24 and do a portrait of an individual. There are lots of situations like that where it is not possible to move the feet for framing.

I've always used my left eye... with 35mm film cameras on through DSLR's and then the X-T1. So I am shooting with left eye on the X-Pro2 as well which works fine for me. I'm so used to it. Have been experimenting with the right eye on the X-Pro2.

The X-Pro2 does track live on Continuous Low (3 FPS). I can also shoot a bit faster than 3 FPS in single mode and the blackout is not a problem.

The blackout on the X-Pro2 is much shorter than the X-T1... like an eyeblink... a big improvement.

I've not noticed any issue... but then it has been chilly where I live. It is when it is +100°F where it will be tested.

EVF Color adjusts saturation... not color balance

This is the key point. OIS does not help for moving subjects. For night photography of people on the street, 1.4 rules. It lets you keep a fast enough shutter speed without pushing the ISO too high. The 16 and 23 are my most used at night. On the other hand, if you are shooting a lot of (fairly) still scenes, then the OIS is handy. I've managed 1/4 and even 1/2 second shots handheld with the 10-24. I consider both lenses indispensable.

I suppose the relic model is not much different than the X-T1 graphite. I paid extra for that cause I like how it looks like my old film cameras (various people have mentioned when seeing me with it that you don't see film cameras much anymore). Somehow a relic model seems like cheating though. Leica can have 2 levels of relic model... the ones that look worn, but look worn in the same way, then the customized worn look where each one is differently worn.