As I’ve been reading through this thread, I’ve been thinking about the reasons for carrying a small, compact (read, pocket sized) camera instead of a DSLR or MILC, or even a bridge camera for that matter. So what I’ve come up with is that there are a couple reasons that come to mind. When we go on a traveling vacation, cruise, etc., it’s all about the trip and having something to record it, so a compact, or even a bridge camera makes sense. But when the purpose for a trip is principally for photography, with the goal of photographing certain things and places, then a DSLR or MILC with the appropriate lenses really makes sense. So in the end, what’s come to mind is that the “right” camera is the one that suits the occasion. Obviously, if one has only one camera, then that’s the right one for all occasions. I feel fortunate that I am able to have a couple cameras, so I can tailor the camera for the occasion.

You make my point that, "it depends." If you want basic good shots to remind you of your trip the smart phone is very convenient and does take good pictures. But I still think my full frame camera shooting with a good 400mm lens in raw will get a better image of a cow (?) moose with her two young walking through the woods when I'm up on the road where there is way more light. Same as when I take pictures of friends in a field of flowers--I think I can do better with depth of fields than a smart phone. But that's what I'm looking for and those who are looking for other things should do what's best for them.

Probably my main theme is that we should all think about what we want photographically and then make our equipment decisions based on that (well, and what we have or can afford).

I love my Fuji X-E2.
APS-C sensor in a pretty small package.
Great lenses, though I personally have only 2, but since it's mirrorless, I can adapt a lot of other lenses to it.
Intuitive controls makes it so easy to use.
Took an X-E1 on my first trip to europe and upgraded to the X-E2 on last 2 trips.
My son used the X-E2 as second shooter for a wedding we did in France in September.
His images are hard to discern from the ones I shot with my D810.

Nasim Mansurov asks that question in his article in Photograph Life (link in next post) and he eventually get an explanation from Iliah Borg.

Buried in the EXIF data in the section pertaining to RAF is a factor labeled "Raw Exposure Bias" that explains a shift in the raw histogram for Fuji X-Trans sensors. Borg provided the following information:
These values are in the EXIF information (truncated to 1 decimal digit) and they start to change at ISO 2000.

Besides the initial confusion that this provided, there is a consequence:

1. Up to ISO 1600, the camera's JPEG histogram is pretty much the same as the raw histogram. If you see blinkies, both the JPEG and raw data are already blown out.
2. Starting with ISO 2000, the blinkies and the histogram still represent the JPEG but the raw histogram starts moving to the left.

Although #1 is useful information, I can see no practical advantage to #2. It makes no more sense than Fuji's Dynamic Range setting that allows you to shift the raw histogram to the left by one stop starting at ISO 400 and two stops at ISO 800 and above.

The OP was not asking for a 'walk around lens'. She was asking for a good lens for head shots and half body shots for her hairstyling / coloring business and provided a link to the type of shots she wants to take. Looking at her Facebook page, I would say her current lens is serving her quite well, (although there were quite a few top of heads cropped off). As I suggested in my earlier post, her shots might benefit more from learning some lighting techniques than from spending big money on fancier lenses.

I should add that her clientele is somewhat of a glamour photographers dream !!