OK, I am probably about to set myself up for some *sshole in UHH to tell me how stupid, ill-advised or obtuse I am regarding photo storage.
If you are one of those types, please scroll on past and resist the temptation to once again prove your superiority.

However, if you are one of the nice guys, and have a moment to spare, I'd like your opinion on my (amateur/novice) methodology.

Basically, I have never completely grasped the whole LR catalogue thing...but I am ok with that because, before I obtained my LR subscription, I did simple edits in iPhoto where I managed my own collections easily. Now that I have obtained LR and Luminar I play a bit in both and use iPhoto only occasionally.

Here's the catch:
I have always been tidy about organizing my photos. Once I have made my edits, I export them all to a folder on my desktop (as jpegs, of course) and place them as a subfolder in Macs Pictures folder. I back them up on external hard drives, SmugMug and run Carbonite in the background. So, finding my pictures is never an issue.

My question:
Is that why LR can never find them again? Since I have made my edits and am happy with the results (i.e. I don't ever go back and re-edit a picture) is my current method a reasonable approach? I understand LR is a powerful tool for photo organization...but do I really need it if I never go back and do additional edits? Does LR only store the RAW images and, because I (gasp) delete them after editing, LR can't find the edited jpegs?

I hope I do not sound like a total idiot. As I said, I am not terribly upset when LR gives me those !!! marks on images...but I would like to understand why and, despite watching several videos on the subject, I still can't wrap my head around it.

Can some of you helpful UHHers provide some assurances that, given my goals (just have fun) and level of competency (reasonably happy with my picture taking skills) my approach to photo organization is adequate for my needs?

I might add that at this point in my life, with so many additional interests, I am getting less motivated to learn new software, etc. Basically, I am strictly a hobbyist who likes taking pictures when convenient....mostly trips and my adult son's rugby games, with some wildlife and macro thrown in for diversity.

TIA

An interesting and helpful series of responses from those who seem to have embraced the Fuji X series cameras.

I've used these cameras since 2013, firstly using the X-E1, X-T1 and X-Pro2 alongside my Nikon D700. I finally decided in 2017 that one make was enough and ditched the Nikons. Fuji's were "good enough" (something UHH normal members might well think seriously about) for me and now I have and am totally content with the X-T2 and 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4 and 56mm f1.2.

My comments upon your conundrum ......

No need to go with X-H1 unless you're big into video. There's a firmware update (this coming week?) which will make an X-T2 a more than adequate camera for your needs. And if you "feel" you need something bulkier in your hands just add a grip (no need for extra batteries etc). No need to get Fuji's extortionately priced grip ...... after all you just need a little extra bulk ! Try this ......

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Meike-MK-XT2G-Brackt-Hand-Fujifilm/dp/B06XBR8RZ4

....... I'm UK based, but you'll get this in the States.

Perhaps for your basketball, and if you're reasonably close to the action, the person who said "it's lens speed which is most important" is spot on, you might look at the 50mm f2 ..... faster focusing than the 56 f1.2, but you should be able to stop the action and crop from the original if you're fairly close.

Please don't buy the wrong camera !

For what it is worth at this point I had the X-T20 and my big hands kept pushing the buttons on the back at the most in opportune time. Even though I took a beating trading, I traded for the X-H1 and don't regret it at all. I had the 18-55 and kept it for the X-H1. My camera that I used before this was a D-810 with a Tamaron 24-70, great camera but I needed lighter to carry and this Fuji. I also bought the 50-140 2.8. This little camera and the lenses have really impressed me, after over 40 years of Nikons.

You mentioned basketball is what you plan on shooting. Go for speed of the lens, you will never regret it. This little camera is designed for video but don't let people scare you off. The X-H1 can compete with any camera out there. Also, this is camera is so much fun. It truely brings a lot of fun back to photography.

I use Fuji gear for a lot of my photography and have numerous primes and three zooms. I think the 18-135 is a very good "walk-about" general duty & travel lens. I actually prefer the 18-55 since it enjoys faster glass, is so small, and is very light. I am not certain you will enjoy the 18-135 for indoor sports, however. Indoor sports usually requires two things. Fast glass to overcome poor lighting and reach. The 18-135 has reasonable reach if you are close to the action, however, it is slow to focus in these conditions and requires a bit of ISO & related grain to function well.

If there is a weak spot, it’s at the widest setting (18mm) wide-open. Here, the corners are noticeably soft at 100% magnification, and the corner sharpness does not match what you can get out of the 18-55mm even stopped down. There is also more light fall-off as compared to the 18-55mm. The 18-135mm performs quite well at longer lengths, with corner sharpness close to that of the 18-55mm at 55mm. It does offer weather resistance which could be a deal-breaker depending on your shooting style. A weather resistant lens (water and temperature) is a great partner with the both these bodies because you can shoot in the cold and rain without a worry. If you don’t want to lug a larger & heavier lens, then the 18-55mm f/2.8-4.0 OIS lens remains the go-to choice with either the XT2 or the XH1 bodies. It provides wonderful results, and it’s better indoors where its faster aperture comes in handy. I almost always will trade length for aperture when shooting indoors. In short, I think the 18-130 is great for outdoors and travel.

Now, on to your desire for the new X body, XH1. As stated earlier by one of the other contributors, the XT2 with the included "kit" 18-55 lens is about the same or less $$$ as the new boy on the block. The XH1 offers in body stabilization which can help in low light with subjects that remain still enough to shoot, which is good. The new body is enjoys better 4K video as well, however, it still has the same sensor as the XT2, is larger, heavier, and loses the EV dial on the top deck. There is a new (September 2018) XT3 on the horizon that is said to enjoy numerous improvements including the all important upgraded sensor. Although is will not include stabilization, it may be a much better body than the XH1 is in it's current iteration. Just some food for thought as we live in exciting photographic hardware times!!! Cheers!!!

I have the X-H1 and X-T2 and numerous lens. The 18-135 is probably the most used because it is useful for so many things. The slower speed has been noted but most of the time this is not a killer. For basketball, it will likely be a problem but to do any better you will need to go to the 50-140 with its f/2.8 speed. But this lens is not good for walking around or travel, etc, unless you can stand to hold a heavier lens. And even if you can, it does not have the wider angle range of the 18-135. Ideally, you would have both, which I do. If I had to have just one, it would be the 18-135. The
X-H1 with its IBIS would be my choice as it allows you to have stabilization for future purchases of lens which are not image stabilized.

Here is a picture (not my own) made with the 18-135 lens. Is it sharp enough to satisfy you?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ripensis/38985389830/in/photolist-22p1jaC-qvoAg8-BNDTbv-26nCTjX-FEFsPF-pAjB2Z-256ntzS-VipoEk-pcmNjm-256mPSh-YCWyu1-prwiRr-pYPQ8y-25DYZJj-qnxxSC-YxZNVN-23QDS9a-rutLRU-r6R8VU-rfZnng-ZeLJ2q-UU6RS8-KHbL5b-EgEHHL-TT22Lx-Z1B4yC-rFKbak-oqb7x8-24CV8Sh-w6tSsR-Tp3F4A-rph6N3-27R9kuv-pBn6gm-S4WgFg-228KKTb-Zs5g7j-qCZoEB-pG7pdD-Wv7z5j-Tr7rd9-pNqP1G-UkLEj9-VTp8tH-pUDDgH-Jc8Zx6-278iP5z-XRUqFq-262KWR1-rnZrKS

I have almost every Fuji lens except the 18-135 which I consider a good travel, or walk-around lens. But based on all the reviews I've read, it's not quite as good as the rest of the line. It's certainly not as fast. Spending the extra money for the new XH-1 and not the less expensive XT-2, XT-20 or the new XT-100 seems a bit overkill if you go with the 18-135. In fact, you will notice that Fuji is offering a number of kit deals on the XH-1 but I haven't seen it with the 18-135 perhaps because it's not the very best match of body and lens. I'm also not sure the 18-135 is fast enough for shooting basketball games because of the typical lighting challenges. For great basketball images, the 50-140 f/2.8 is your best bet, but it's expensive (although there's package deal with the XH-1). For a very good everyday lens I think the 18-55 is quite remarkable for its price, and it's sharper and faster than the 18-135. Right now, you can buy an XT-2 with the 18-55 for less than the XH-1 body alone. And for those basketball games, you may want to consider the 55-200. It's on sale now for $599. I've shot professionally with three different Fuji bodies and almost all their lenses, and I would think the best way to start would be with an XT-2 body, 18-55 and 55-200. The XH-1 is a superb camera, but bigger and heavier than most Fuji's due to its in-body stabilization feature. But I don't see the great advantage if you shoot with Fuji's stabilized lenses. The XH-1 seems to be aimed more for video shooters than still shooters. I don't mean to discourage you buying the XH-1, but it just seems that you may want to put more money into your lens budget and a little less into the cost of the XH-1 body....unless you plan to shoot a lot of high end video. Either way, you're going to love shooting with the Fuji system.

You can't go wrong with ANY Fuji lens, they are all good, but the 18 - 135 is one of the most useful! The kit lens, 18-55 is also just about indispensable tiny lightweight giving you the equivalent of a 28 - 80 moderate WA to portrait length, I also have a 200 and a 12mm prime lenses. I would get the camera with the kit lens and play around with it before I decide to get another lens. Find out what you need first. In any case, if you are like most users, you will love that little camera - just the way it handles, - not to mention the gorgeous images it gives you.