umad?

There is big difference between 50MP and 50MP

single subject - single point. Using zone for such a subject is just not the way to go

Crop is 3:4 symmetrically, so you know what you will get. No exposure control?! Dude, you got a RAW converter build into your camera

it's 5.6mm But your main point is valid: the X100 is small, because the lens is inside the camera. Of course the whole lens construction (and optical design) of the X100 lens is different to a lens for an ILC. Aperture, ND filter, flange distance, mount diameter, focus motor. In the end it comes down to this: 1. you can build a lens, that (together with the camera) is the size of the X100. But it will suck 2. you can build a lens with the quality of the X100 lens (probably even better) and it will be bigger. How much? a bit.

And you got more than 0.5% distortion? Because that it's probably out of spec. The X100 is optically corrected for distortion and that's as good as it gets for such a compact camera. The XF23 /2.0 will have more and be electronically corrected.

Lenses and camera not broken? That it was a human error. Sorry to say so

Won't

either you had your hands too close to the subject or the lens is broken. Personally I'd go for the 35mm f/1.4 if shooting low light is a priority. The X-Pro2 really gave new life to that old lens. Very fast and accurate now.

No, it isn't. The f/2.0 has internal focussing (which makes it bigger), the f/1.4 not The f/2.0 has weather sealing, the f/1.4 not. The f/2.0 has a new AF motor All those things make a lens bigger. But then again: it wasn't the ideal to build the lens as short as possible, but to not interfere with the optical viewfinder of the X-Pro2. Don't know where you are getting the distortion idea from, but the X100 lens is optically corrected for distortion. It's somewhere around 0.5%. And the XF23 f/2.0 will have distortion (though electronically corrected)

1. is normal. thats the sound of those AF motors 2. is not but probably can be fixed by Fuji (if the lens is optically very good I would think about that option)

Haven't done it with the new sensor, but the old 16MP Sensor was really good. And also the cameras. Focussing would be similar to the Sony. Either with magnification (and some light source) or a bit of trial and error (I have marked just the infinity spot on my lens). The sensor doesn't produce a lot of dark current noise and the few hot pixels will mostly be removed by the dark frames. With the viewfinder you can set it (with a button on the body) to: LCD only, EVF only, Eye Sensor and EVF and Eye Sensor (all displays are off until the eye sensor detects something and activates the EVF. Personally I have just turned down the brightness on the LCD. Lenses for those kind of shots would be: Samyang 12mm f/2.0 Fujinon 14mm f/2.8 Zeiss 12mm f/2.8 Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 Fujinon 10-24mm f/4 The Samyang is often said to be one of the best lenses for this kind of stuff. It's sharp and bright. However it doesn't focus at infinity where the focus ring says (you have to try it and mark it). And there is very little coma. The Fujinon 14mm is just as good, but 1 stop slower. The Fujinon 16mm is acceptable sharp wide open (not as sharp in the middle as the samyang or 14mm wide open), however it suffers from quite some coma on the edges. The 10-24 works too, however it's an f/4.0 lens - that's not really what you probably want to go for. The Zeiss 12mm would work too, but I don't see the point in this, since there are the Samyang and Fuji 14mm both cheaper and as good (if not better). There are some reviews about Fuji gear and astro photography on the web. http://www.lonelyspeck.com has some reviews (I think both the X-T1 and Samyang 12mm have been reviewed) In the end a Sony A7S with the right glass will probably give you a bit better images, but I like the Fuji because it is very capable and also very light and flexible.

Only if you view at a higher magnification. At the same there will be no difference. But of course: to get to the best possible image quality not only technology needs an update, so do the users The noise performance is light hitting the sensor and sensor technology and not by the pixel size. If you view the image at the same size, the new sensors has less noise (and it doesn't matter if it has 12 or 24 or 42MP as the A7S vs A7RII shows) The performance of the processor (EXR II to X Processor Pro) was improved drastically. And so was the readout of the sensor. The new 24MP sensor and processor are much faster than the old combination. And that is only the beginning. No. The new processor is more powerful and it does lossless compressed RAWs. Those raws are smaller than the once from older 16MP cameras (about 25MB vs 33MB) There isn't really anything that goes against a jump to 24MP. The pros are, that you can get higher resolution images if you want.

I read all those DPR articles on the X-Pro2 and A6300 and I couldn't find what you two are talking about. Could you point me there? Oh, here is DPR studio scene: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a6000&attr13_1=sony_a6300&attr13_2=fujifilm_xpro2&attr13_3=nikon_d500&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr171_0=off&attr171_1=off&attr171_2=off&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=0.019993164730006865&y=0.015014783459542371

And it probably will be a few more months

it is. 2 batteries in the grip. It's said the camera is made for sports too. Only with the batterygrip you will (probably) get maximum performance (like max fps).