Phil

I use a Think Tank Retrospective 7. It can comfortably fit my X-T1 with a lens mounted, an extra lens, a speedlight, my Instax, and whatever accessories you'd need with those with room to spare. There's definitely room for another lens in there, but I've been having trouble finding more versatile dividers for the bag, so I've got a couple compartments with a lot more empty space than there should be. Currently looking for a divider that's only velcro'd on one side, so I can use the flap between one lens stacked on another.
 
Packed bag by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
Contents by philbabbey, on Flickr

The T has better AF/overall performance, a more fleshed out viewfinder, wifi, and the Classic Chrome/electronic shutter firmware. Not to mention, the T has the new standardized control layout, so if Filippo gets into Fuji as a system, he'll have a smoother transition to future bodies. If those don't matter, then by all means, save some money and go with the S. But rather than explain that for every post, I think it's easier to just recommend the T, seeing as it's the current model.
 
The X-Pro 1 is a totally different ballgame IMHO, and someone should go into that camera knowing what to expect and being willing to make some performance sacrifices for the experience. Same goes with the original X100, but to a lesser degree. While the X-Pro 1 is indeed a fine camera, and even though it's seen improvements through firmware updates, it's still a very clunky camera by today's standards and could potentially turn off some newcomers. It's a great way to get your Fuji fix on the cheap, but I don't think it's good to recommend it as a first camera without some warnings.

I wouldn't be scared of the X100T if I were you. I got the X-T1 to be safe, because I do the odd paid job and wanted to make sure I had interchangeable lenses and the fastest handling possible. After owning the X-T1 and using an X100S, I'd prefer the X100T for everyday/street/travel photography. If you do the odd portrait or take landscape a little more seriously, you can get the wide and tele adapters for the X100 and get 18mm, 23mm, and 35mm.
 
When I'm just shooting "personal" work or taking my camera around with me, I often have trouble choosing which lens to bring (or end up bringing a larger bag that holds all three) - if I had the money, I'd grab an X100T just to use as an everyday camera to streamline everything that much more.
 
If you don't need a huge range of lenses, and don't need the fastest performing Fuji camera possible, I'd say the X100T is worth a serious look. For what you mentioned in your original post, it's maybe the perfect camera.

Pretty much that exactly. Shooting a wedding or event for the first time would be stressful with primes (unless you're super comfortable with your focal lengths), but after one or two, you get a pretty good feel for how things will go, and you can pick your primes from there.
 
Personally, I'd use probably the 16mm and 35mm for environment and detail photos before anyone else gets there. If I was shooting the bridal parties getting ready, I'd almost definitely use the 23 and 56, and probably live on the 23 until I wanted tighter headshots and such. The ceremony would definitely be 23 and 56. 23 if you're close or need some environment, and 56 for tighter shots, or to allow you to back away a bit and give the couple some space. (I shot a wedding with a girl who only used a 50mm, and for close up shots for the ceremony, she was literally standing arm's length from the couple, up in front of everyone - very distracting.) Bridal portrait/wedding party photos would be 23/56 hands down, unless I needed something wider for a particular shot. I'd probably do the same for speeches and more formal reception moments, like the first dance. For reception candids/dancing photos, I'd switch back to the 16/35 combo, so I could get in close for dance photos, and keep the 35 handy for natural light candid stuff or impromptu portraits.
 
All that is based on having two bodies to work with. If you only have one body, I can see lens choice being even more crucial. I second shot a lot of weddings last summer with one body, and chose a 17-50 2.8 as my primary lens so I had the versatility, and just used my 50 1.4 when I needed the wide aperture.
 
My Fuji situation is a bit different. I only have the X-T1 right now, but I only have primes (currently the 18, 23, and 35, and hoping to get the 56 and 16 before too long). If I was doing a lot of weddings or paid work, I'd be buying a second body as soon as I could afford it, but I'm not really looking to get into too much paid work, so I'm stuck with the one body for the foreseeable future. I've got one wedding that I'm doing as a favour this summer, and I'll have to make a lot more decisions beforehand about what lens I'll be using for certain situations. I'm expecting I'll be using the 23 for getting ready photos, probably the 35 for the ceremony and majority of the bridal portraits, then using the 23 for reception candids, and switching to the 18mm + flash for dancing photos.

Another Bokeh shot!!!
 
X-E2 + Walimex 12/2.0 @ f/2.0 and minimum focus distance
 

Who needs a WR lens!?!?!
 

The cannon by Kwyjibo Van De Kamp

Hi, playing with my samyang 12mm...
 
City reflections by Dustin Iskandar, on Flickr

I wouldn't be scared of the X100T if I were you. I got the X-T1 to be safe, because I do the odd paid job and wanted to make sure I had interchangeable lenses and the fastest handling possible. After owning the X-T1 and using an X100S, I'd prefer the X100T for everyday/street/travel photography. If you do the odd portrait or take landscape a little more seriously, you can get the wide and tele adapters for the X100 and get 18mm, 23mm, and 35mm.
 
When I'm just shooting "personal" work or taking my camera around with me, I often have trouble choosing which lens to bring (or end up bringing a larger bag that holds all three) - if I had the money, I'd grab an X100T just to use as an everyday camera to streamline everything that much more.
 
If you don't need a huge range of lenses, and don't need the fastest performing Fuji camera possible, I'd say the X100T is worth a serious look. For what you mentioned in your original post, it's maybe the perfect camera.

Not my first fisheye, so I think it will continue getting considerable use. The reason, is that I am not using it to shoot typical "fisheye" shots, but much more as a superwide or panoramic lens that has curvature which I don't emphasize. I have tested it using the X-Pro1's sweep panorama, and stitching worked! I have also tested stitching in the new version of Adobe Camera RAW with dramatic results.

I find it does very nice interiors with all four walls, when shooting from a corner. Landscapes are quite dramatic as well. Photoshop CC has tools that can pretty much straighten everything, but for the most part, I don't bother.

I didn't shoot much street on my honeymoon, but got a few!
 
DSCF1278 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF1298 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF0822 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr

John B&W by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF0086bw by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
Dave b&w by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF0128 by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
Cory by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
That Dirty Racket by philbabbey, on Flickr

I wouldn't be scared of the X100T if I were you. I got the X-T1 to be safe, because I do the odd paid job and wanted to make sure I had interchangeable lenses and the fastest handling possible. After owning the X-T1 and using an X100S, I'd prefer the X100T for everyday/street/travel photography. If you do the odd portrait or take landscape a little more seriously, you can get the wide and tele adapters for the X100 and get 18mm, 23mm, and 35mm.
 
When I'm just shooting "personal" work or taking my camera around with me, I often have trouble choosing which lens to bring (or end up bringing a larger bag that holds all three) - if I had the money, I'd grab an X100T just to use as an everyday camera to streamline everything that much more.
 
If you don't need a huge range of lenses, and don't need the fastest performing Fuji camera possible, I'd say the X100T is worth a serious look. For what you mentioned in your original post, it's maybe the perfect camera.

I didn't shoot much street on my honeymoon, but got a few!
 
DSCF1278 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF1298 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF0822 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr

A couple of my newest guitar. Taken with the X-T1 and 35mm.
 
DSCF0007 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF0012 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr

1st engagement shoot of the season with the X-T1, 56mmf1.2 and the 18-55mm. Lovely evening light. Used spot metering mode for most of the backlit shots and quite impressed.
 
 

Looks like I'm the odd one out here, but I totally disagree.
 
It seems to me like they're planning on replacing the 35 1.4. And I think this would be a great idea. The 35 1.4 is a great lens, but it's a bit of a jack of all trades. The AF is a little dodgy for street or event shooting, but it has great IQ. And everyone loves the idea of the 35 f2 WR. 
 
I think they're better off replacing the 35 1.4 with two lenses. If they axed the 1.4 and just kept the f2 WR, portrait and low light event people would be out of luck. 35mm is too tight for me for an everyday lens, so I use it for portraits and low light event work, like concerts. I'd kill for the f1.0 for the times when even 1.4 is a little dark, and I'm assuming 1.0 will mean even better image quality at 1.4 and 2.0. Changing the 35 1.4 into two different specialized lenses meets more customers' needs, and I think making a crazy flagship lens just because they can adds some character to the company that many are lacking. Look at how well the Otus lenses are doing - they might fit a smaller niche than a 50mm 1.8, but those who like them like them a lot, and that can still mean the lens will sell.
 
If the 33 1.0 is crazy expensive like the 56 APD, I definitely won't be able to buy it anytime soon, but if they can get it around the $1000 like the regular 56, I'd gladly sell my 35 1.4 for it.

Awesome photos everybody. :yesway:
 
Here are a few from a bar show I shot Saturday night. Really wishing I had FW4 for it. The band wants to do a promo shoot, hopefully sometime this week. :yesway:
  DSCF0202-2 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0222-2 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0230 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0260 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0273-2 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0277 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0283-2 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0495 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr   DSCF0505 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr

John B&W by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF0086bw by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
Dave b&w by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
DSCF0128 by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
Cory by philbabbey, on Flickr
 
That Dirty Racket by philbabbey, on Flickr

I think it all depends on your focal length preferences, but if you like ~50mm, then yes, I'd say it's a must own lens. The AF has gotten a lot better with newer bodies and firmware updates. And there's just something about the look it gives - it's warm, but just a little bit muted to my eyes. 
 
OP, if you like the 50mm equivalent focal length, I think you should get it. IMHO the AF is fine to the point where you should be looking at this lens based on its focal length, and not its AF speed.

Grandmas more often ride wheelchairs than bikes... 
 
Of course, I see your point over there, but when we now got the ability too shoot at ISO 3200 with great results. Why not take advantage of it, in combination with fast primes? Instead of thinking of how impossible that was 20 years ago. 

.
 
 

shadow play II by Christoph, auf Flickr
 
 
:.

X-Pro1 and the XF35mm wiiiide open and SOOC (except for 2 blemishes removed).

I can wait.
My X-pro 1 is still working perfect. A little slow, but i am slow too 
 
Next year we have 2016 technology instead of 2015 technology, thats the positive way of thinking.
Be patient and everything wil be ok.

I had to go to an engagement party last night, and almost didn't bring my camera because I didn't know most of the people who would be there. I decided to bring it anyway. I didn't shoot anything at the party, but saw a cool tree on the way there. It's stuff like this that makes me drag my camera with me everywhere.
 
DSCF0170 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr

I had to go to an engagement party last night, and almost didn't bring my camera because I didn't know most of the people who would be there. I decided to bring it anyway. I didn't shoot anything at the party, but saw a cool tree on the way there. It's stuff like this that makes me drag my camera with me everywhere.
 
DSCF0170 by Phil Babbey, on Flickr