The buzz around the web is that Adobe Lightroom does a shitty job with the handling of RAW FujiFilm X-Trans files and that Iridient X-Transformer is the fix. I think it's mostly ignorance from some photographers. Other photographers have taken a "zoom in until you find a difference" approach, testing the software, only to discover that the difference varies very subtlely between photographs and other factors help make the decision.
I think that once an image has been post-processed, then downsized and compressed for the web - most photographs are being shared online via blogs, Instagram, Facebook, etc. - that there's very little practical difference. If you are a professional photographer, aka someone whose source of income is photography, who must produce the best technical image, the difference may be of concern to you. However, if you are a photographer, professional or amateur, for whom the technical bits of photography is not the main point, then I think you must do whatever produces the results you want, even if it's the SOOC JPEG.
I've visited many art and photography galleries in my lifetime. I don't recall anyone suggesting that I use a pair of binoculars or a magnifying glass so that I could better appreciate the work.
The featured image in this blog post is a FujiFilm X-T2 RAF post-processed in Adobe Lightroom. I made adjustments to exposure, contrast, highlights, shadows, whites, blacks, vibrancy, and saturation. I left the sharpening and noise reduction at the Adobe Lightroom defaults.