Maurice

I don't have the 16-55, but manual focusing an AF lens can be a little stuttery in its response. If you're just talking about the mechanical feel of the focus ring, that should be smooth. Maybe some dirt has gotten in there after all?

Plan on getting CC when? You could start a Capture One trial in the mean time, that's 30 days. There is also the Iridient X-Transformer which should make your files compatible with any LR. But you'll have to buy it to remove watermarks.

For those who still have questions, bigheadtaco will do a X-E3 Q&A live stream 8 and a half hours from now at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9rxx76Bsws

It's not only possible (obviously), touchscreen doesn't even work in the menu's (yet) https://youtu.be/_UU8L_yUKTs?t=14m20s

It's more like a running gag that got out of hand. Me too! Expecting Fuji to come out with a new roadmap along with the X-T2. Seems logical.

I don't see why it would be weird. Because it doesn't exactly match a number used previously by another brand? And 1:1 of course is the what this whole thing is about.

If by not much larger you mean both the inside half and outside half combined on top of a lens mount, then sure. But this topic is about the X200, and personally i'm hoping for the same lens, but with close range correction, a.k.a. a floating element. To keep its character, but maintain performance across the whole focusing range. I don't mind adding a few millimeters if that means they can add a proper manual focus mechanism, or possibly a standard filter-thread. I don't think it would be good to go 28mm equiv, you'd need to get very close to get right in the moment (something that i think the X100 is meant to do), or shoot only wide angles, which is not often ideal. Of course sometimes it is, but not as the only option. While the WCL is a greatly underrated addition that offers that already. It works perfectly with almost no quality degradation. Looking at the optical construction with the WCL attached you can see why, it looks almost like it was designed like that. The TCL on the other hand, not so much. A very unnatural looking lens projection, not bad in performance per se, but not very attractive, and way darker than it could be. The best thing i think would be a second body option, with a 35mm F1.7 (50mm equiv) or similar, much like the classic Yashica Electro 35. And a larger magnification OVF to match. I think that would be a huge success. Possibly as much of a game-changer as the original X100 was. With the Ricoh GR, Nikon A, Leica Q, and now X70 all going wide. Let us hope Fuji has seen the light, and use it to fill that huge void in the market that is a 50mm equiv fixed lens camera.

That ISO dial is quite ugly with 12800 on it though.

Looks like the two batteries in the grip slide in from the side, easily accessible. The one in the camera is fine where it is i think. Probably just in there as a backup most of the time. Assuming it only starts using that battery when the other two are completely depleted.

I think it's a nipple button, easier to feel blindly. Edit: on second look though there doesn't seem to be anything there on the image from the back. So probably just a droplet indeed. And i think the Tilt screen will not be attached to any bulky rods K1-style. Can't imagine it will even be remotely like the K1 on such a compact body. But of course side-hinged in addition to tilt is entirely possible. =)

I think the 18-135mm would be your best best since you don't feel like changing lenses other than for special purpose. You say 18-135mm is soft at the long end ? but that is in comparison to the other Fuji lenses, i think that in comparison to the 24-120mm you have now it might not even be a downgrade at all. And remember it's already at 120mm equivalent at 80mm! So you get a whole lot of bonus range. If weight is the primary reason then what you get per gram with the 18-135mm on a X series camera, not just range but also quality, it probably doesn't get any better. That includes adding any optional special purpose prime of your choosing. Not to mention WR, and OIS.

Great idea, and quite feasible. A lens like that would fit in very nicely i think. But a whole other story .. surely not an alternative to any 33mm F1. And no reason we can't have both! A 33 appears to be up first if anything .. no way around it.

Off-topic: I doubt it, since a x-mount lens can't be built half of more into the body, it goes 'in front' of it. But the X100 is about way more than a flat lens. (has been discussed numerous times already)

Yes, but what about the framelines preview option we were talking about?

That would definitely be awesome. The 56mm is great, but a 33mm would be a much more useful focal length for me.