algrove

Seriously. I don't know what people are complaining about. Also, most web-photos are viewed at around 2 Megapixels. The X-T2, even when pixel-peeped, at ISO 6400 looks same as most APSC or even Full frame cameras. When downscaled from 24 to 2 megapixels, it should look great. And it does, based on the photos people posted here. 

It does not. But you should probably reset it yourself anyway.

My previous Nikon D600 had a LCD on top - as most other DSLRs do. I don't miss it on my X-Pro2, but still it was kind of helpful on the D600 and would be helpful on the X-Pro2 especially when shooting with the screen switched off and only use EVF. You have all the information you need on a tiny screen.

I am a recent convert to Fuji. I have been a professional photographer for 28 years mainly shooting Nikon with some Canon years in between. I have worked in local and national press for many but running my own photographic business for the last 16 years. I own the 10-24mm and think it's a wonderful piece of glass. I agree, when pushed at f4 it can get soft at the edges but after about f5.6/8 it becomes very sharp. I shoot a lot of commercial interiors (real estate) and have used Nikon 12-24mm f2.8 but I think this matches it and then some. The reason being is the style in which I shoot. A lot of my clients have cut budgets over the years so the huge day rates have all but disappeared. In order to make the books balance I needed to find a way of shooting faster but still deliver the quality finish. This lens, with the OIS, allows me to do this. I can now shoot a house interior much quicker as I no longer have to rely on using and lugging a tripod around. Even with 10mm I still find myself squeezing into tight corners, something the tripod wouldn't allow. I regularly shoot at 1/6th of a second, handheld and get pin sharp images. If you have the time, and already own the primes you need it's probably a moot point but if you're in the market for a one size fits all prime thus is a fantastic piece of glass.

Like all things, the answer is "it depends."
 
If I was shooting for a client, I would get the 10-24, easy. If I was shooting for me, hell no, give me the primes.
 
I take better photos with primes. Exploring a scene with a single focal length and really getting your mind into that focal length is a much better way for me to work, if I'm not under the gun. Plus, I like the increased sharpness and typically lower distortion, and predictable distortion.
 
Why not just set a zoom at one focal length and not change it? Yeah right, I don't have that kind of self control! 
 
But for a client, psh, no question, give me the zoom, I'm not gonna miss the shot my client wants chasing perfect.
 
This is basically how I feel about zooms vs. primes across the board.

I love these questions as the variety of replies always gives me something to think about. I'm pretty much in the camp of stay with what you have - there's a lot of good use cases in these comments to evaluate for one thing.
 
I can only comment on my experience and what's good for me and why, so here goes.
 
X-Pro2, 14mm f/2.8, 23mm f/1.4, 23mm f/2 35mm f/2, 18-55mm f/2.8 and X100 - that's my kit for family, friends, events, street, travel
 
I work in urban, rural, dusty and dark environments along with all the others.
 
I bought my Fuji as a light weight alternative to a DSLR which I still have.
 
I find the 14mm f/2.8 and 23mm f/1.4 to be extremely useful lenses especially in the way they interface with or promote manual focus. I bought the 23mm f/1.4 as a result of having the 14 and discovering the MF clutch.
 
The Fuji is my go to camera. The 23mm f/1.4 is my indoor family/event lens, the 14mm f/2.8 is my urban travel, landscape and travel interior lens, the 35mm f/2 is my family head-shoulder, small group, candid  and street lens. The 23mm f/2 is my walk-about-in-the-desert lens, the 23mm f/1.4 is my critical stitched panorama lens, the x100 will do all of the above and did until I got my XPro2.
 
Whenever I have an equipment crisis, especially lenses, I search LR for all the times I used the lenses involved, or those close to those focal lengths. I see what worked and try to think of what I missed in those situations and if a new focal length/aperture would help. Then I take the lenses in question and use it only for a week/month as an evaluation of what does/doesn't work. When I concentrate on just one focal length I often find that it boosts my creativity and vision with that focal length. If I'm thinking about a prime and I have a zoom that covers that focal length, I do the same for a week/month with the zoom taped to the focal length in question. I can't think of when I've really lost ground with those efforts - I almost alway come out a more creative and skilled photographer. 
 
Another thing that helps me is that I try to think about my equipment usage as "roles" rather than features. That often mitigates the questions about focal length overlap or too much/little of something. As you can see, I have three active 23mm lenses. They have different roles. There's hardly a time when I've spent/wasted time deciding on which one to use - they have their jobs. 
 
One thing that does help my decision process is that I have an XPro2 and the 23mm f/2 lens sometimes begs for usage because it is more VF friendly on that camera. What also fits into the roles on my equipment is weight. The travel weight, carrying a camera for 24/7, does have a role in deciding on personal comfort and ease of travel, especially if I'm on a concentrated public transportation tour.
 
Just some things to think about as you sort this out.
 
The advice of never sell a lens that you like is IMO good advice. If you look at my lens closet, you might extend that to "never sell a lens". That's because in my experience, life changes and sometimes you meet your going requirements, coming. I've been photographing for several decades and my prime lens has been the 35/23/35/23 lens, several times for different, non-contiguous decades. That's because my life and family have been through different stages where there are naturally different emphasis on life and recreation. There is also the personal growth as a photographer to consider. Years ago I would never be comfortable photographing a person with a 17mm lens, now I routinely do that with a 14mm lens.
 
Good luck and 
Best Regards,
Roger

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the quiet lenses are the ones with linear focus motors (they use magnets instead of a motor). So far it consists of the zooms and the 90mm IIRC. All the primes use traditional motors - they all vary in noise/volume, but the 16mm is one of the quieter ones. Out of the lenses I own, the 16mm and 56mm are the quietest, and the 18, 23, and 35 are all louder.

No rumor, but I had the chance yesterday to meet Kunio San here in Tokyo. "Father" of the x-pro2 and all the f2.0 primes as well as the GFX. And guess what? All of the sudden in between the sushi, beer an sake I had the chance to play with this camera.