gordonrussell76

I picked up my X-T2 2 hours ago from local shop. Win for the Local shop
 
So far I am blown away. As i read someone say somewhere it makes X-T1 look like a Beta model and I loved that camera.
 
So far only tried it with 35mm F1.4 as that is my favorite lens and the one I know the best. AF improvement in High Perf mode (no grip) is absolutely fantastic real improvement especially given that is an old lens. Its now lightening fast. Continous is good for stills, but its very very hunty in video mode, however I was useing the general CAF setting I have not played with the custom ones yet so this may improve. Also the 35mm will generally be used in Manual focus mode when I shoot video, I was just testing it for interest.
 
So many nice little touches, the layout feels more open without the video button, the joystick is cough a joy, the d-pad is so much more confident and firm and easy to find with your fingers. IN video mode when you drop shutter speed from 30 to 15 on the dial it automatically goes to 1/24 or 1/25 of a second if you are in a 24FPS or 25FPS video mode, this small detail is huge on the X-T1 if you were in those modes you had to fiddle about and could not get 1/24th if memory serves me right.
 
Structurally the side doors for SD card and interfaces are so so much better. THe battery door satch switch feels less robust than on X-T1 but that might be becuase its so smooth there is no resistance and it feels weird. Time will tell, to be honest I am splitting hairs here but I thought I should put something in to balance the gushing.
 
The images so far have been very very good, but not had time to process or get them on a PC so this is based on the back of the camera, but resolution improvement is very good.
 
I will post more thoughts in the coming days, but its a solid upgrade giving me a lot of the ergonomic AF and video improvements I have been waiting for. Further use of the AF in more varied settings and with better lens is needed.I am very interested to see how the 50-140mm does as apparently that is my fastest focusing lens
 
G

I picked up my X-T2 2 hours ago from local shop. Win for the Local shop 

 

So far I am blown away. As i read someone say somewhere it makes X-T1 look like a Beta model and I loved that camera.

 

So far only tried it with 35mm F1.4 as that is my favorite lens and the one I know the best. AF improvement in High Perf mode (no grip) is absolutely fantastic real improvement especially given that is an old lens. Its now lightening fast. Continous is good for stills, but its very very hunty in video mode, however I was useing the general CAF setting I have not played with the custom ones yet so this may improve. Also the 35mm will generally be used in Manual focus mode when I shoot video, I was just testing it for interest.

 

So many nice little touches, the layout feels more open without the video button, the joystick is cough a joy, the d-pad is so much more confident and firm and easy to find with your fingers. IN video mode when you drop shutter speed from 30 to 15 on the dial it automatically goes to 1/24 or 1/25 of a second if you are in a 24FPS or 25FPS video mode, this small detail is huge on the X-T1 if you were in those modes you had to fiddle about and could not get 1/24th if memory serves me right.

 

Structurally the side doors for SD card and interfaces are so so much better. THe battery door satch switch feels less robust than on X-T1 but that might be becuase its so smooth there is no resistance and it feels weird. Time will tell, to be honest I am splitting hairs here but I thought I should put something in to balance the gushing.

 

The images so far have been very very good, but not had time to process or get them on a PC so this is based on the back of the camera, but resolution improvement is very good.

 

I will post more thoughts in the coming days, but its a solid upgrade giving me a lot of the ergonomic AF and video improvements I have been waiting for. Further use of the AF in more varied settings and with better lens is needed.I am very interested to see how the 50-140mm does as apparently that is my fastest focusing lens

 

G

Might not be able to as its hard wired to the collar underneath the SS dial.
 
G

Might not be able to as its hard wired to the collar underneath the SS dial.
 
G

I've tried several times to warm up to Capture 1, especially given that they give you a slightly limited version for free if you shoot Sony. But I can't stand the fact that it litters the file system with its own files and other several small annoying quirks (well, annoying from the perspective of a LR and PS user). But thanks for the suggestion!
 
That said, and even if I'm a self-confessed sharpness nut (in terms of lens performance) I'm not too obsessed with the sharpest possible print. Quite the opposite actually, I think sometime a print too sharp might look unnatural or, even worse, take away the attention from your subject to the technical quality of the print itself. So I get what you say when you write that you have to move the sharpness slider the other way with some lenses, otherwise the results will look "unflatteringly sharp".
 
A proper print, IMO, (and based on what you say I guess you agree) should be transparent, for lack of a better term, and every enhancement (and I post process my files quite a bit) should be in function of the subject.

HI all
 
I am very pleased. I put my order in on the 7/8th July with my local camera shop Chiswick Camera Centre who I bought my X-E2 and some lenses through as I like to support local shops that let you get hand on. I was at first hesitant as I thought the WEX's and Amazons of this world would probably get there shipments first and I would be sat waiting around for the second batch. I got a call today saying my X-T2 had arrived this morning and that I can come and collect it first thing tomorrow (not today due to embargo).
 
So very pleased that not only have I managed to support a local shop but I have been able to do so without any penalty in terms of delivery okay its not being delivered I have to pick it up, but its a 5 minute walk so I will live
 
G

But why do you need the specs. Just because a picture has more resolution does not mean its better. i don't think we are there yet, but there will come a time when the resolution will make things too clinical. Actually in some ways we are already seeing that a little bit with HDR. A lot of non-photgraphers I know instinctively don't like HDR, they look at it an go woah that's fake how much photoshop did that guy use. I want people to react to my pictures based on content, composition, the technicalities of the image are important but they should not be visible. Best advice I ever got on mixing was "add an effect till you can just about hear what its doing, then pull it back a few notches from that point, if you can hear it its too much" I think we are getting to the same place, if you can see how technically perfect a photo is, its too much.
Of course I realize this is a subjective opinion

Hi there
 
So the Sony range of cameras have the following MP ratings. I am going to ignore the A7s mkI and II as they are aimed at lowlight and its unfair to make comparisons on resolution with them as that's not there bag.
 
A7 - 24 MP
A7R - 36Mp
A7ii - 24MP
A7Rii - 42MP
 
Fuji claim that thanks to no AA filter and the nature of the X-Trans sensor that there sensors resolve to a higher equivalent than the MP rating suggests, this figure is in brackets.
 
The Fuji X-Trans II sensor (X-T1/10/Pro1/ X-E2) = 16MP (24MP)
The Fuji X-Trans III sensor (Xpro2 and future X-T2 ) = 24MP (36MP)
 
So if you buy an X-Pro 2 even going by the lower rating it has an equivalent resolution to the A7I and II and can just about touch the A7R. All of this is not taking into account that these MP counts are spread over a much smaller surface so that does increase effective/percieved resolution (perhaps that is where Fuji are getting the figures in brackets.
 
Bottom line the Sony A7RII is going to resolve more detail than the X-Pro 2, the A7R will resolve more detail than the rest of the Fuji bodies and the A7 is probably a tie.
 
Another factor. Fuji lenses, Sony have some gems in their line up and some more coming, but as a balanced range of lens Fuji cannot be beaten, in every segment of the line up the lenses excel, there is not a bad lens in the bunch in terms of sharpenss. Some have slower than ideal AF with older bodies and that it in terms of criticism. Even the 'kit' lens is sharper than some primes I have used frmo other systems. the 18-135mm zoom normally a cheap throwaway affair in other lineups is still a very useable and sharp lens from Fuji.
 
This will have a huge impact on your sharpness.
 
A lot of the lens having Satbilization built in. No this is not IBIS, but IBIS is a one size fits all solutoin, the individual stabilization in the Fuji lens is designed specifically for that lens, the stabilization requirements of a 18-55mm are very different from a 100-400mm lens. I personally think this approach is superior, unless you are using legacy glass or primes.
 
So can Fuji resolve as sharp as Sony. most of the time in normal use cases I would say yes. If you are a landscaper where its everything then maybe the A7Rii is the one to go for. Sports, buy a Nikon/Canon everythign else you will be more than happy wtih Fuji.
 
OH and I forgot to mention colour, the colour and contrast and rendering from the Fuji has a look that is unique but present, and its very rare I get bum images. I get boring images becuase my composition is bad, but never because the camera has not rendered it well. IN fact this is why its such a great range for Street becuase it can turn the mundane into something beautiful. Its B&W rendering is pretty damn sweet as well.
 
The Sony will have slightly better background blur/DOF effects, but again with the Fuji if portraiture is your thing if you pair the X-T1 or X-Pro 2 with any of the 35mm/56mm/90mm or 50-140mm you will have no problem achieving 'that' look. 
 
Go look on Flickr/500px compare contrast. Or hire an X-T1/Pro2 and i guarantee within a day you will be hooked.
 
G

I think you are projecting your own suspicions there. Based on my experience this edited version of your sentence is way more likely in reality.
 
I am sure they were more lucky with their first cameras, then success struck and they had more users meaning that issues pop up much quicker and there is a wider set of use cases to satisy because the diversity of the user base has increased with that success.
 
Or your right a company that has waited 4 years to release a camera in todays market do seem to have let success go to their head
 

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 

I hear you on the weight difference but I have found that weight bother me less with Fuji system. I have big shoulders and I rarely notice the load with any 3 lens in my Tenba DNA 8 what is more important is can i get 3 lens in there and still have any lens on the camera at any time. The minute I have to swap a lens just to get it all back in the bag is when I get frustrated. Everyone is different.
 
With the 10-24/35/55-200 it all works. Granted the 14/35/55-200 would also work well and be lighter, but you would be giving up a lot of versatility as I see that lens as a 10/14/18/24mm primes.with what i shoot I would rarely go below F4 at those focal lengths so Aperture is not a priority scuse the pun.
 
35mm gives me something bocalicious and is just a great walkaround lens and 55-200 rounds it all out in the long end and aperture is not important as compression at longer focal lengths tends to take care of subject seperation without relying on bokeh.
 
However I am getting more and more tempted by an all prime travel kit going really simple so a 14/35/90 setup is mightily tempting Obviously the rolls royce version you take the 16mm and 35mm F2 and be fully weather sealed. I would probably stick with F1.4 though as I will never sell that lens and I can't justify 2 in the same focal length just to have WR, come on F1.4 mk ii with same optics faster AF and WR don't care if its slightly bigger its my favorite lens.
 
FROD on the subject of ultrawide, thats why I like the 10-24mm ultra wide relies on you being super close to work (bizarrly) I would never wnat to be caught with only somethign super wide on teh camera (and I only have or want 1 body) I tend to use the 10-24mm at 24mm or 18mm most of the time, but its great if the situation allows and I am in the right place to be able to have 10/12/14 to call on when I need them. Horse for courses though.
G
 
G

Your going to get a lot of opinions on this I like the 18-135mm and if you have kids with you when you travel buy it.
 
Basically my recomendation would be 
 
Wide 10-24mm - it not that much bigger than the 14 and 16 and it gives you so much more, its a great great lens.
Normal - 35 F1.4 (great low light option) 18-55mm or 18-135 to be versatile
Tele - 55-200 best bang for buck in terms of sharpness and reach. Slower AF than 18-135 and not as well stabilized.
 
Personally I would go with the 35mm F1.4 option above Its a small kit you can fit in something like a Tenba DNA 8 you have coverage from 10-200mm and you have a low light option. You have 2 portrait options in the 35mm and the 55-200 at 90mm is very nice starting to get compression but also still have some DOF effect. You also have 2 street options the 10-24mm is great at 24mm and the 35mm is born for the street, just use it stopped down and any AF issues go away.

I love that based on a couple of pictures a bunch of you decided it was going to be 10-15% bigger, because obviously as photographers the idea that whatever lens that took the picture might have distorted perspective never should have occurred to you I mean people just put coins or batteries into pictures to show scale for no reason

The 35 F2 is faster AF than the F1.4 but the F 1.4 is faster aperture, ie you will be able to blur backgrounds more.
 
Not only that I find the rendering on the F1.4 to be nicer, at this point its a purely subjective thing, they are both sharp fantastically executed lens. The F2 is sligthly more clinical and the F1.4 is warmer, more film like and better for Portrait. They both excel at Street.
 
Fast AF is not everything, also the 35mm has rarely let me down in most conditions. We are talking fairly small differences these days with a X-E2/X-E2s, X-T1 or X_T10 or X-Pro2 body when it comes to AF. 
All my favorite pictures in this system have come from the 35mm F1.4 including those of my daughter. I have one of her that is probably my proudest moment. However I don't share pictures of my daugther on the internet. 
 
I have jsut put a gallery of 90mm street images up in this forum and you can check out my flickr stuff here, have a look at the 35mm images.
 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/10596811@N04/
 
Specifically have a look at Team Building a great image from my 35mm. Also my avatar of the lightbulb was shot with the 35mm.

Yes although in order to get bokeh with the 60mm you are probably going to shoot it wide open at 2.4 at which point the blades are not having any effect. At 2.8 its bokeh will be smoother than the 56mm and 2.8
 
However the 56mm and 1.2 its fairly nice
 
Don't get me wrong I love the 60mm and I actually found in certain circumstances it focused faster than the 56mm on an X-T1 with all updates.
 
This brings me to something that really annoys me about Fuji lens and people keep passing on secondhand information thats probably out of date. Probably 80% of my Fuji lens have been bought S/Hand and of those ALL of them were on original firmware and had not been updated.
 
I think that a lot of people buy a lens try it, don't update firmware and then write it off as not good enough. Others read the original review from the old firmware and take that as gospel.
 
Buy or hire the lens, update the firmware, use it and then you are entitled to comment on it.
 
I really don't want to hear any more he said she said stuff, its often out of date and incorrect and will cause people to make incorrect buying choices and potentially waste there money.
 
G

Yup Fuji cameras have automatic functions, and they will work well enough in daylight applications. In low light you need to take manual control, and in fact in Daylight you are better off using amnual control as well as its better to expose for the highlights and then bring up the shadows in camera or in your RAW editor.
 
However if you want sharp I would highly recomend using a shutter speed of 1/200 at least, because while you may not be moving your wife might be :

The fact that it looks as though its the same one on the X-Pro2 when I tried a X-Pro 2 out recently I found the dial on that particular model to move a little too freely for my liking, it was also too big for my preference and I don't like the C functionality I think it over complicates it all. 
 
However and lets be honest here I am not a huge fan of EV at all, I prefer working in full manual majority of the time. Now that ISO dial is going to be free moving I doubt I will ever touch the EV knob again. But others like it so I am glad its there. I am happy for features I have no use for to be present. I get that others have a use for them. I am also humble enough to realize that many features I don't use now might be because of my own failings in understanding and as I grow as a photographer I may find I do use them. 
 
So whats the release date going to be eh. I am off to Canada on an amazing 3 weeks trip around Vancouver Island, the smaller islands the rockies and onakagen valley. I fly 8th August, do you think the X-T2 will be available by then. I am was originally thinking very very unlikely, but now we are starting to see images, and given June announcement. On the other hand the earthquake makes me wonder whether it might be further delayed?

Makes sense to release close-ish to X-Pro 2
 
I think Fuji have a bit of a marketing nightmare on their hands.
 
X-Pro2 is rightly the flagship in the sense that it has the hybrid viewfinder and with AF updates and a new sensor its going to be a great camera. However a lot of people (rightly or wrongly its still a fact) prefer the SLR shape and the additional control provided by an ISO dial etc. I think Fuji realize that they have a huge audience for the X-T its been there most popular camera and that if they wait to long to release it after the X-Pro2 then they might annoy everyone.
 
They obviously want a little bit of time for the X-Pro2 to be the only game in town so it does not get totally trounced in sales which would be embarassing given its the 'flagship' model, and more expensive.
 
G
 
 
 
G

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 

I work in IT and the reality is that you can do absolutely exhaustive testing and you can still miss stuff that the minute you put it out there in the real world someone will find in about 2 seconds flat.
 
The reset bug is a classic example. Most testing involves going through a set of pre designed tests, most testing is designed to be repeatable so they probably used the factory default settings as there starting point for all tests. Which meant that they were probably reseting the camera at the beginning of each test cycle. Its highly possible that they never noticed the reset issues because they never configured the cameras away from the default and they were reseting it so often themselves it would not show up.
 
I am slightly more surprised that the Beta testers (actual photographers) never picked it up. But again I suspect that it only resets if you change one or two specfic options from the default and probably in combination. Again this may not have shown up depending on whether the user 'happened' upon this combination of options by chance.
 
Sometimes the only way you are going to find these things it to let users find them (a much much higher number than you will ever be able to afford or organize at Beta level) and then respond to the issues that come out quickly and effectively with a fix.
 
That is exactly what Fuji are doing, if they did not we would never get a new camera.
G 

HI there
 
I love the 18-135mm its a great travel lens
 
Where next really depends on what you like to shoot. If you shoot wildlife or want more reach then the 50-230/55-200/50-140(with TC) or 100-400.
 
I don't get the impression thats what you are after but I mention if for completeness.
 
For me there are two-3 lens you should think about next and these fall under two categories.
 
1) 35mm F1.4 you have all the versatility you could want with the 18-135 18mm is plenty wide enough for most situations you have a macro(ish) lens all you are missing is a low light monster and the 35mm is such a supremely versatile prime that will allow you to do so much and also if you were travelling with a 2 lens kit the 18-135 and 35mm is great little combo, add the 60mm in for a 3 lens kit and there is not much you can't shoot except very long or ultra wide.
 
2) 10-24mm or 14mm the 18mm of your 18-135mm is very useful (the 18mm on the 18-55 is slightly better but not by a huge factor) I would sell the 18-55mm and get the 10-24 or 14 depending on your budget/space consideration so you have an ultra wide option.
 
Personally I find the 18-135mm plus 35mm and 10-24mm is my ultimate travel kit I can fit all 3 lens into a Tenba DNA 8 messenger bag, I have ultra wide covered, I have a fast normal prime and I have the 18-135mm as a walkaround lens and for portraits its a great lens in the 70-90mm range, sharp as thats the sweet spot of the zoom and while you don't get background blur from aperture at that zoom you start getting compression blur and so it works well for portraits at a pinch, Its never going to hang with the 56mm or 90mm primes but it does the job if you want to keep lens to a minimum. Swap the 10-24mm for the 14mm and its an even lighter and more portable kit. That is a great option. I only went for the 10-24 for two reasons flexibility and because I shoot video occasionally and I have high hopes for the next generations Fuji video capabilities and the 10-24mm is ironically hands down the best ultra wide for video in the mirrorless world.
 
Why?
 
1) Threaded filter, most other ultra wides from other manufacturers don't have a filter ring so ND filters become a pain.
2) Constant aperture zoom.
3) Super flexible focal range 16mm - 35mm essentially and that is great for the video I shoot which is mainly bands in tight spaces. the 35mm for close up details shots compliments this lens very well. If you have not desire for video or for width below 14mm then get the prime.
 
However conclusion the next lens I would buy would hands down be the 35mm F1.4 it is still the lens I judge all other in the range by. I still prefer the rendering of it to that of the 56mm and even the 90mm its an awesome lens. There is a lot of hype around the 35mm F2 as its weather sealed and slightly better built (focus ring smoother, aperture ring tighter) but no-one looks at a beautiful picture and says wow I bet that was taken with a lens that had a smooth focus ring. Give it a couple of years and the hype has died down and people will realize the F1.4 is the daddy and the F2 is a great lens if you value compactness and weather sealing highly due to the style of shooting you do.
 
G
 
Disclaimer - I have shot extensively with all the lens mentioned above except the 14mm/50-140mm/35mm F2 and 100-400mm, the first three I have used in a shop the other is too new for me to have got anywhere near.

Hi there
 
So the Sony range of cameras have the following MP ratings. I am going to ignore the A7s mkI and II as they are aimed at lowlight and its unfair to make comparisons on resolution with them as that's not there bag.
 
A7 - 24 MP
A7R - 36Mp
A7ii - 24MP
A7Rii - 42MP
 
Fuji claim that thanks to no AA filter and the nature of the X-Trans sensor that there sensors resolve to a higher equivalent than the MP rating suggests, this figure is in brackets.
 
The Fuji X-Trans II sensor (X-T1/10/Pro1/ X-E2) = 16MP (24MP)
The Fuji X-Trans III sensor (Xpro2 and future X-T2 ) = 24MP (36MP)
 
So if you buy an X-Pro 2 even going by the lower rating it has an equivalent resolution to the A7I and II and can just about touch the A7R. All of this is not taking into account that these MP counts are spread over a much smaller surface so that does increase effective/percieved resolution (perhaps that is where Fuji are getting the figures in brackets.
 
Bottom line the Sony A7RII is going to resolve more detail than the X-Pro 2, the A7R will resolve more detail than the rest of the Fuji bodies and the A7 is probably a tie.
 
Another factor. Fuji lenses, Sony have some gems in their line up and some more coming, but as a balanced range of lens Fuji cannot be beaten, in every segment of the line up the lenses excel, there is not a bad lens in the bunch in terms of sharpenss. Some have slower than ideal AF with older bodies and that it in terms of criticism. Even the 'kit' lens is sharper than some primes I have used frmo other systems. the 18-135mm zoom normally a cheap throwaway affair in other lineups is still a very useable and sharp lens from Fuji.
 
This will have a huge impact on your sharpness.
 
A lot of the lens having Satbilization built in. No this is not IBIS, but IBIS is a one size fits all solutoin, the individual stabilization in the Fuji lens is designed specifically for that lens, the stabilization requirements of a 18-55mm are very different from a 100-400mm lens. I personally think this approach is superior, unless you are using legacy glass or primes.
 
So can Fuji resolve as sharp as Sony. most of the time in normal use cases I would say yes. If you are a landscaper where its everything then maybe the A7Rii is the one to go for. Sports, buy a Nikon/Canon everythign else you will be more than happy wtih Fuji.
 
OH and I forgot to mention colour, the colour and contrast and rendering from the Fuji has a look that is unique but present, and its very rare I get bum images. I get boring images becuase my composition is bad, but never because the camera has not rendered it well. IN fact this is why its such a great range for Street becuase it can turn the mundane into something beautiful. Its B&W rendering is pretty damn sweet as well.
 
The Sony will have slightly better background blur/DOF effects, but again with the Fuji if portraiture is your thing if you pair the X-T1 or X-Pro 2 with any of the 35mm/56mm/90mm or 50-140mm you will have no problem achieving 'that' look. 
 
Go look on Flickr/500px compare contrast. Or hire an X-T1/Pro2 and i guarantee within a day you will be hooked.
 
G

I just don't get all the people so chained to Bayer sensors. I have nothing against Bayer at all, have had and enjoyed a lot of cameras with them.
 
However I love the Fuji cameras and the X-Trans is part of the individual parts that sum to create a great whole. Changing the X-Trans to Bayer could and probably would compromize that.
 
Its like buying a Ford and then wishing it had a Opel engine. 
 
The only reason for the X-Trans hate is Lightroom, and again why are people so attached to it. Everything we use is just a tool if you are willing to switch camera system you should be willing to switch all your tools.
 
Back to the car analogy, I have family who work in the auto trade and nowadays with cars being so computerized you have to buy different software and peripherals to allow you to service different makes of car. If you decide to become a ford dealer you will have to change add to your tools. 
 
I used LR till I got a Fuji, then I switched to Capture 1 it is what it is. I play a lot of music, over the years I have switched software many times depending on what best served my needs at the time. Is it expensive yes, but what cost more some additional software or a loss of productivity and quality in your output?

I just don't get all the people so chained to Bayer sensors. I have nothing against Bayer at all, have had and enjoyed a lot of cameras with them.
 
However I love the Fuji cameras and the X-Trans is part of the individual parts that sum to create a great whole. Changing the X-Trans to Bayer could and probably would compromize that.
 
Its like buying a Ford and then wishing it had a Opel engine. 
 
The only reason for the X-Trans hate is Lightroom, and again why are people so attached to it. Everything we use is just a tool if you are willing to switch camera system you should be willing to switch all your tools.
 
Back to the car analogy, I have family who work in the auto trade and nowadays with cars being so computerized you have to buy different software and peripherals to allow you to service different makes of car. If you decide to become a ford dealer you will have to change add to your tools. 
 
I used LR till I got a Fuji, then I switched to Capture 1 it is what it is. I play a lot of music, over the years I have switched software many times depending on what best served my needs at the time. Is it expensive yes, but what cost more some additional software or a loss of productivity and quality in your output?

LIttle point of note the X-T10 also works like this and I believe that the X-E2 with firmware 4 and X-E2s also work like this so there are now 5 cameras in the range that allow you to adjust exposure via comp wheel when in full manual A and SS but auto ISO.
 
X-Pro-2
X-T1
X-T10
X-E2 (firmware 4.0)
X-E2s