Sella174

To the OP: The reason I left Canon was because of their emphasis on video, instead of stills photography. In terms of me and myself, Canon thus ignored their current market, went after another market and lost a customer. Probably no big deal to them and I'm sure, just like Canon, FUJIFILM won't fold if I stop being a customer when they make video cameras that can also do stills.

"Video really needs to be top priority for Fuji"  Very true -> For their next VIDEO camera.

I've owned the T2 for 4 months and have yet to try the video. If video is a priority then I would recommend you get a Canon DSLR, a Sony, or a Panasonic camera. I will eventually try out the video but it is not at the top of my list. Right now if I need video I use my iPhone, which has been more than adequate.

-1. Photo is priority.

Why must video be top priority for Fujifilm? I think flash, for instance, is higher on the list? Or better battery life (without resorting to a bulky grip).

Two comments:
1. Your personal priority of video over still photo is hardly shared, in my opinion, by the majority of Fuji users.
2. Comparison of arbitrarily chosen video clips made by people of varying skills under different lighting conditions with differing lenses, shooting different subjects proves nothing. I mean, absolutely nothing.

Yes, but I still fail to see the logic of it, it is like putting a bigger and bigger engine in every new model of a car although the speed limits  and the tire size stays the same. But I guess, it is indeed a byproduct of the bigger, better, improved and more expensive paradigm.

Except for one poster, you all have it terribly wrong. Focal length, especially for "street photography" is not about field of view, but about perspective. Thus for the OP the choice between the 23mm and the 27mm should not be made on the basis of field of view or even actual physical size of the lens, but on how the perspective of each lens will define the ultimate style of his street photography.

Except for one poster, you all have it terribly wrong. Focal length, especially for "street photography" is not about field of view, but about perspective. Thus for the OP the choice between the 23mm and the 27mm should not be made on the basis of field of view or even actual physical size of the lens, but on how the perspective of each lens will define the ultimate style of his street photography.

Frankly, my opinion is "To each their own".  If heavy editing in software makes you happy and gives you results you like, awesome!  If you want to be a "purist" and use jpg's SOOC and love doing that...awesome!
 
So what is more important?  Answer:  Whatever makes you happy.

Photography is an art, not an exact science. Thus the white balance can be whatever the photographer feels like at that time. Of course, it is within your right not to like it, but then the inverse is also my right not to like a "scientifically accurate" white balance.

This is actually what I like about Ken Rockwell - I know it's crazy, but I really like that he has very high expectations for manufacturers in future iterations of their cameras - to keep pace.  This is why, a great deal, he says to stick with what you have, unless certain things really attract you.
 
That said, I love my XPro2, together with both Leica and Fuji glass.  I just simply find Leica cameras simpler, but not necessarily more capable.
 
 
M9, M8, MM, 50 Lux 1.4, 35 Lux 1.4, 16-18-21 Tri Elmar

As always it's worth to upgrade to a direct replacement model only if you're a working photographer who uses camera every day or you have extra money. 

Because the X-Pro1 was a phenomenal camera when it came out and thus also when Rockwell wrote his review of said camera. However, like most people with a website consisting of hundreds of pages, he probably doesn't keep revisiting and updating the content already posted, but continually moves ahead with new stuff.
 
This said, there is nothing weird about "loving" the X-Pro1 (when it was released) and now being "unimpressed" with the replacement camera, now. It is probably his opinion that the X-Pro2, apart from the more megapixels of the sensor, is not really that much of an advance over the X-Pro1, as a lot of the old niggles are still there.
 
And similarly I won't be much impressed by the X-T2 sufficiently to entice upgrading from the X-T1.

The problem with these types of "weathering" is that although it looks good to the amateur, most seasoned photographers can immediately see that it is fake because there are "weathering" marks where there should not be if from normal usage.

Of course one can do anything one wants with the things that are his or hers.
 
 
Not only on a camera since there are people out there who are into more or less extreme forms of body modification and yes, it is their body even if some have managed to make it look like a serious accident happened to them.
 
The freedom to do anything that you want with things that are “ yours” doesn’t prevent the rest of people to have a reaction and an opinion about what amounts to communication.
 
If I wear a t-shirt with a shocking text is because I want to shock people. If people are shocked:
 
1) I shouldn’t be surprised
2) I’ve achieved what I wanted to do
 
If I make a camera to look like it has been used a very long time, and in so doing implying that I am:
 
1) a photographer which shoots really a lot
2) a photographer which only cares about the “ substace of things” as I have a working camera that looks like shite, but hey, I am “ degagee” and only care about function.
 
(...except that now the looks are not the result of use but the result of a preordained desire to show how much I photograph so I maybe caring about its looks even more than I care about its function, no?)

Let me guess. Do u have fashion tatoos too? Do u wear fashion glasses when u dont wear glasses? Do u spend hours trimming ur facial hair every day? Do u splash mud on ur Truck/SUV to appear macho? Do u smoke cigars to be more manly?  Do u sand ur motorcycle tires sidewalls to pretend that you know how to lean?

DO u know what a hipster means? It means all for show. No substance all show.  U r definitely a member of the hipster club.

Do u follow the wind whereever it blows? Do u hang on the coattails by supporting every sports team that wins the championship so u can be part of the winners even though you dont care about the sport or know anyting about it?   

This is the problem with society today. Zero substance. Everyone wants to pretend to have experience and fake it.

Where r ur actual photos?  Wearing down ur equipment grants u zero credibility as a photographer.  JUst so u know.

“ A rose is a rose is a rose is a rose “ and "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
 
A fake is a fake is a fake is a fake and call it what you want, it remains a fake.

So, that fact shows that you switch on and off you camera a lot. They are scars produced by use.
 
What does OP’s scratches caused by abrasion made with sandpaper or steel wool say? 
 
You got to earn your stripes, scars and scratches. 
 
What would you think of someone making an offroad car with spray paint simulating mud? I know that you now probably think that I am crazy but not, it does exist!
 
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/jun/14/uknews
 
“ ...According to the company's website, spray-on mud can help give your friends, family and neighbours the impression you've just come back from a day's shooting, fishing or visiting friends who live on a farm; anything but driving around in town all day or visiting an out-of-town retail park.
 
"People may want to look like they've been off-road, but they certainly don't want any chips or scratches on the paintwork while they're doing the school run,”...."
 
 
​There are now “ wraps” simulating the dirt of a race car on a car that hasn’t raced a second in his life, and that’s a good job because most of their drivers would die because they are certainly inapt to race a car but they want “ the look"
 
worn-out-martini-livery-porsche-911-gt3-rs-has-awesome-beater-look_7.jpg
 
 
distress new, old looking furniture, burnt o made on purpose, from pieces, but expensive, of course and their cheap equivalent copies too
 
dutch-design-chair-made-from-durable-cardboard-3.jpg
 
Willow-5-Drawer-Chest-LARK2415.jpg
 
These are times of “ pretend” 
 
Tattoos can be bought, scars have to be earned!

Why do so many of you read Rockwell's reviews and then declare that he is always 'crap' or some other derogatory term? You keep rereading them and keep declaring them irrelevant.
OK, I get the point, but just remember that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I don't read his reviews having done so
once or twice. There are a few excellent and generally objective review sites out there. Why not stick with them? It's time to bring this thread to a merciful end.

Can't understand why you did this to a new camera. If you want a used camera, make it because you're traveling and shooting a lot, not because you think it is stylish. For me it is stupid to have a fake used camera. 

Fun stuff is when you take a RICOH 55mm f/2.2 lens and flip the rear element.

It looks like you confuse bokeh with background blur. Bokeh is the rendering of background blur. There can be two lenses with same focal lengths and apertures but totally different bokeh. Also 140@2.8 is about the same as 90/2 in terms of background blur.

Except for one poster, you all have it terribly wrong. Focal length, especially for "street photography" is not about field of view, but about perspective. Thus for the OP the choice between the 23mm and the 27mm should not be made on the basis of field of view or even actual physical size of the lens, but on how the perspective of each lens will define the ultimate style of his street photography.

Super-Takumar 55mm f/1.8 lens: