Stefan Ciulu

Lulian, You kind of made his point for him, your arguments are based on specs not image quality, a myopic viewpoint
 
I see so many people these days focused on objective analysis of camera rather than Subjective. 
 
 
Objective analysis is best suited to technical and scientific pursuits.
 
Subjective is suited more to the Arts which as technical as photography can become it is still an art.
 
Put another way I never hear art historians saying that Van Gogh's work is better than Da Vincis because he used a higher quality of beeswax when he made his oil paints.
 
" Hmm Van Gogh is clearly better, his oil paints were 24ml beeswax not 16 ml beeswax".
 
How pathetic does that sound. Now replace ml with Mp and you realize how stupid all this is.
 
G 

Dell XPS 13 : 13" inch borderless screen in the body of a 11" notebook. Faster, lighter, less expensive that a Macbook Air 13". And the screen is QHD+ (3200x1800), very sharp and useful for editing photos.

If....... conjunction introducing a conditional clause, something that isn’t here and now and that, as far as we know, here and now, might never materialize.

  The future will naturally bring better cameras, with better everything.
 
One can spend a whole life waiting for Godot and for the next camera to come... and take no pictures in the meantime........... but we live here and now.
 
Better a ( not-so-bad) camera in your hands than a greater one in the mind of the engineers.

Well as far as I'm concerned, I think you are being overly critical.
 
1. The shutter speed dial is reflective of every camera ever made (to the best of my knowledge) that has a manual shutter speed dial. The ability to adjust in third stops using the dial is a bonus. The new changes with FW4 will further enhance this for manual shooters. Trying to have 40 odd click-stops on such a small dial would be overkill.
 
2. Seriously? Take a shot and review the viewfinder display, or bracket - it's on a tripod for goodness sake. Better yet shoot in RAW.
 
3. If the 56mm is too short and the 90mm is too big I don't know what they could do for you. 85mm effective focal length has been portrait standard for years. The 90mm (135mm equivalent) is the next step in virtually every pro system. Got an issue? Use the 60mm macro and cover your portrait AND macro needs.
 
4. Yes the Fuji system has flash shortcomings. They know it and are working on it. Buy a couple of cheap Yongnuo triggers and get over it until they bring out the new flash units.
 
5. Don't you think if Fuji could fit the X-T1 battery in the X100T they would have done it? It's like a pro canon shooter complaining that his 1Dx battery won't fit in a 5D3. Wow, Fuji is doing this "horribly wrong". If managing two battery types messes you up this much don't get a X100T.
 
Some of your suggestions are valid, but they are certainly not things Fuji is doing "horribly wrong".

The  failing or detaching of the adhesive rubber coating seems to be a common occurrence yet not all X-T1 owners are lamenting the rubber wearing out, falling off and the bulging of the doors.
 
Whatever it is, Fuji is not, by and large, refusing to address the problem. 
 
These things happen.
 
Every company has to deal with problems and companies shouldn’t be judged because of the freaky occurrence of a rubber skin ( a material which they bought in good faith) falling off but they should be judged based on the way they deal with a problem.
 
So far they came up trumps whenever a member has taken the proper initiative to get in touch with the head office.
 
The local repair labs, I have to say, don’t have an equally positive attitude and sometimes, as we have seen, they have said no and then the head office said yes.
 
Perhaps Fuji should keep the reins a little tighter and teach their repair people that gaining a customer is difficult an losing one is VERY easy!