(11-15-2022, 10:59 PM)Klaus Wrote: Just curious - did you consider the 17-70? An 18-50mm feels a little too limiting in my book. However, I probably couldn't live without "24mm" at the wide end.
The 17-70 doesn't cut it anyway if you need 24mm equivalent. So you would need a second, wider lens anyway.
In my worldview, the (ugly?) truth is that no one I know actually is content with having a 24-xx zoom as their widest lens (normalizing to FF for simplicity's sake). The local AFP shooter is the most conservative - she's using a Nikon 20/2.8 lens in addition to the 24-70/2.8 (on a D5 or D6). The rest all have at least the Canon 17-40 or Nikon 17-35, but mostly lenses with the 16-35mm FL (if not the Nikon 14-24 or the Olympus 7-14). And once you add an ultrawide, the 1mm at the widest side of your actual standard zoom start to have a bit less meaning...
Answering your question "where's the point". Fuji is a good, mature system. I was seriously considering it for a while (yet ended up with Nikon Z, but that's not to say that Fuji X is not capable in any way. Most likely my decision swung this way because Nikon Z was better accommodating to my existing Canon lenses).