JayPhizzt

The X-T2 is an amazing camera, but you shouldn't switch systems based only on a camera, the lenses are equally or even more important I'd say. With Fuji however you get absolutely amazing lenses :) ...

Why are you a HUGE fan of X-trans, if I may ask? Personally I see no benefit with it and I would prefer a bayer CFA. RawTherapee is the best software for X-trans, no doubt. Iridient is good to. ...

While the worms are a result of oversharpening, the "watercolor effect" isn't because of any PP, it's just a demosaicing issue in LR that mostly occurs on foilage or certain other more complex ...

It would and so would RawTherapee(which imo. is the best software for X-trans).

I'm guessing you're talking about Iridient Developer and if so yes :) Else you can use Iridient X-transformer to convert the files to DNG's and then edit them in LR. It all comes down to which ...

Holy crap that's a lot of worms :( Seems like you've oversharpened quite a bit. LR6 isn't good for X-trans and I would recommend you to either use X-transformer or switch to another editing ...

If you don't need 1:1 magnification then I can highly recommend Fuji's 60/2.4 macro. It has great image quality and a very nice bokeh :) Any particular reason why you specifically want 60mm, btw?

I haven't tried the 16-55/2.8, but I have the 16/1.4 and it's an amazing lens :) It's very sharp(and has good corner sharpness) and it has lots of micro contrast. It also has fast AF and a great ...

I'm not, since most of the image quality lies in the lens and not the camera/sensor :P That is if we're just talking gear, else most of the image quality lies in the photographer :)

Well, you could go with an X-T100, which has a bayer sensor. The X-trans issues aren't that big of a problem as long as you use the appropriate software to process them, though.

Nope, I'm not and I'm not at all discrediting Sigmas art lenses as I know they're amazing. If I had FF one or two of the art primes would have been my first choices :) I'm just saying that several ...

Do keep in mind that the inferior sharpness you perceive in the Fuji lenses can also at least in part be because of X-trans files that haven't been properly processed. I have Fuji's 80mm macro and ...

I just prefer metal, that's all :) The build quality of the 18-35/1.8 was by no means bad, but I would have prefered a full metal construction.

I used to have the 18-35/1.8 as well and it was a great lens. Both my current Fuji lenses(16/1.4 and 80/2.8 macro) are better, though. However the biggest downsides to the 18-35/1.8 is that it's ...

Higher resolution and maybe a bit better noise performance and dynamic range is what an X-T2 would get you, since those three things are the main differences between different cameras/sensors.. :)

Why would you give up image quality? Sure, you might lose a bit of noise performance and dynamic range going from FF, but aside from that most of the image quality lies in the lens and Fuji's ...

It's actually 100% on the JPG's and more like 50% on the RAW's. You can unfortunately not view the RAW files at 100%. This is something I hope Fuji will fix in the future, they should even be able ...

Most rumors actually seem to be pointing at 26MP, so a very small upgrade in resolution in that case.

Most of the image quality lies in the lens so it doesn't really matter what camera you choose regarding that. Fuji does however generally have amazing lenses :) And if it's worth waiting for the ...

Well, with Fuji you will get a lighter kit, EVF and focus peaking like you said and of course the wonderful dials and Fuji's amazing lenses. The upside to the D7500 is of course that it has a bayer ...