18-55 F2.8-4 aperture ring a deal-breaker compared to that on the 16-55 F2.8?

I might be getting an X-T3 and if I do, I have narrowed down to a choice between these two zoom lens. Given that the X-T3 has robust controls for ISO and shutter on the body already, does anyone find the mark-less and free-wheeling (I understand there are stops though) aperture ring of the kit lens kind of a deal-breaker as it makes identifying the selected aperture different from the other controls? Does the aperture ring on the more expensive option offer better operability, or is this just something that someone new to the Fuji system like myself can eventually adapt after a month or two?

Background: I've used my Ricoh GR 2013 model till early this year, when it died. I'm very used to the level of customization and usage the GR provides, i.e. yay to dials and direct control. I have an upcoming family vacation in end October where I'll like to bring a dedicated camera along, so unless the GR3 rumors pan out and I am indeed able to get one before/during the trip, I'm most likely picking up the X-T3 as my next long-term camera.

The only reason why I'm only interested in one zoom lens is really to cure GAS, having been 'trained' by the GR. I wouldn't pick the 16-55 just because of the constant aperture (I think I can live with F4 @ 55, if I ever hit that focal length for portraiture-like shots), although I think having better WR is a minor plus, and it really boils down to the aperture ring for my case.

I'm quite new to Fuji and don't find the lack of markings an issue at all really. I suppose that, yes, it would be quite handy to be able to look down and see what aperture I'm on, but the XT-3 will have a very good viewfinder and rear panel which will help make up for it.

Apart from the constant vs variable aperture, which you're ok with, for me the main things to weigh up are the size and the 16 vs 18mm at the wide end. I would love the 18-55 to go to 16 obviously but I find that it's a beautifully made, extremely compact lens that has given me great results so far. Coming from Nikon FF the 16-55 just seems like not enough of a separation in terms of size and weight compared to the 18-55.

I'm a user of the 16-55 and the 50-200.  The latter has an unmarked ring, which isn't as good, but it is perfectly OK.  The only way round it is the 50-140, weight, size and cost argued against it for me.

Never found the unmarked ring on the 18-55mm an issue at all. It's a great lens.