Previous page Next page

Raw and Raw Conversion

Supplied software

The Fujifilm X-E1 ships with the 'FinePix CD' software disk, which includes:

  • MyFinePix Studio Ver 3.2 - A basic file viewer / manager (Windows only)
  • FinePix Viewer Ver 3.6 - A file viewer / manager (for Mac OS X 10.3-10.6)
  • RAW File Converter EX - A full-featured RAW converter based on SilkyPix

The X-E1 ships with its own customized, but fully featured version of SilkyPix, called RAW File Converter EX. This is a flexible piece of software that includes a vast range of options and adjustments, and which is capable of producing pretty impressive results. It's not the easiest converter to get to grips with though: its menus give the impression of having been machine-translated, the available options aren't necessarily very logically organized, and the on-screen 'Help', although comprehensive, is about as obtuse as you'll ever find (it tends to repeat what the options are, rather than explain what they mean). But if you're prepared to put in the time and effort to work it out, then the results can be very worthwhile.

Once you've worked your way past the slightly odd terminology (images are called 'scenes', and parameter sets get saved to the 'cloakroom'), you'll find a vast range of tools to rival industry leaders such as Capture One or Adobe Camera Raw. This includes features you won't always find in bundled software, such as highlight recovery, lens aberration correction, and perspective correction (here known, somewhat obtusely, as 'Digital Shift').

SilkyPix allows you to open a folder of images in thumbnail view, so you can easily find the image you want to work on. Double-clicking on an image (or 'scene') brings it up to full-screen for editing. The feature set on offer is comprehensive, but the lack of any meaningful documentation (and occasionally incomprehensible menu options) mean it can take a while to really feel comfortable and to find your way around.
Most options have plenty of presets to allow you to start getting good results without too much fine tuning. Once you're comfortable with the options, you can save your own favored settings as additional presets, to speed up your processing. There's a plethora of tool palettes that can be brought up and dismissed by clicking on icons at the bottom left of the window. Advanced functions on offer here include highlight recovery, lens and perspective corrections, and color fine-tuning.
The level of control can be a little overwhelming - for instance, in addition to the White Balance tools on the left-hand toolbar, there's also a White Balance Adjustment palette. The two don't appear to interact, which can be confusing. And, once you're really familiar with the software there are some very fine-level controls over functions such as noise reduction and sharpening. It's not the most approachable software but it's very powerful once you understand it.

RAW conversion

As usual we like to compare the supplied RAW conversion software, any optional manufacturer RAW conversion software and some third party RAW converter. In the case of the Fujifilm X-E1 we used the supplied RAW File Converter EX, Adobe Camera Raw 7.4 RC plug-in for Photoshop CS6, and Capture One Pro 7.0.2.

  • JPEG - Large/Fine (default settings)
  • ACR - Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.4 RC (default settings)
  • Capture One Pro 7.0.2 (default settings)
  • RFC - RAW File Converter EX (default settings)

Sharpness and Detail

Most cameras show distinctly more detail in RAW compared to their JPEG output, due to a combination of over-enthusiastic noise reduction and unsubtle sharpening usually present in the JPEGs, but de-mosaicing programs have struggled to handle the X-Trans sensor until recently. As a result on the X-E1 and X-Pro 1, it's the in-camera JPEG conversion that pulls a huge amount of detail out of the sensor data. Adobe Camera Raw, Capture One Pro and Raw File Converter EX all struggled with fine detail, particularly with detail in foliage.

The latest versions of ACR and Capture One both do considerably better than their predecessors, now rivaling the X-E1's JPEG output. Between the two, Capture One Pro characteristically sharpens more noticeably, while ACR leaves things a bit softer, producing a file with fewer sharpening artifacts, presumably so photographers can make their own choices about how much sharpening to apply. Fujifilm's own version of Silkypix comes up short without some custom tweaking, as you can see from the crop below, which is soft and murky.

JPEG (Default settings, manual WB)
ISO 200 studio scene 100% crop
Adobe Camera Raw 7.4 Release Candidate RAW ->JPEG (Default settings, manual WB)
ISO 200 studio scene 100% crop
Capture One Pro, (Default settings, manual WB)
ISO 200 studio scene 100% crop
RAW File Converter EX, (Default settings, manual WB)
ISO 200 studio scene 100% crop


In this comparison of the high-contrast detail of a test chart, the situation is slightly different. The in-camera processing produces a clean image that's entirely free of artifacts. Neither RAW converter can deliver higher resolution, and neither can quite match it for cleanliness either. Both ACR and Capture One produce color artifacts, but the latest versions do better with detail; Capture One's images are again a little sharper than they should be, leaving slight halos around areas of high contrast. SilkyPix's default rendering is softer, yet still exhibits some color error, though faint.

JPEG from camera RAW File Converter EX (RAW)
Adobe Camera Raw 7.4 RC (RAW) Capture One Pro 7.0.2 (RAW)

Raw conversion artifacts

The X-E1's unique feature is, of course the X-Trans CMOS sensor, with its non-Bayer color filter array. This requires an entirely different de-mosaicing approach to produce an image file from the sensor data, and consequently third-party Raw converters can't support the camera as easily.

Adobe Camera Raw had trouble with color bleeding into spaces it shouldn't. Look closely at the Fujitsu and Rowney logos below, comparing the JPEG images to those translated with ACR 7.3. Even the blond hair passing over the robot body in our test shot turns to red and blue as it passes over the different colors. Adobe has minimized this effect, though overall image sharpness is reduced; it's difficult to tell whether the two phenomena are related, but it's far easier to fix softness than it is color bleed.

ACR 7.3
ACR 7.4 RC
100% crops

Our studio test scene reveals these errors quite distinctly, but they're not as apparent in most real-world images. Still, those who want the image rendered as correctly as possible will cheer the new efforts of Adobe and Phase One, who seem to have successfully tackled the difficult de-mosaicing challenge posed by the X-Trans sensor.

See our more detailed analysis of Adobe's new X-Trans engine, built into the ACR 7.4 Release Candidate in our 'Adobe's Fujifilm X-Trans sensor processing tested' story.

Real world advantages

As we've shown above, Fujifilm's excellent processing means that the X-E1's JPEGs lose nothing in terms of detail compared to RAW. On top of this, the camera's generally-reliable white balance and appealing color rendition (especially in Soft/Astia mode) means that for many purposes it makes perfect sense to shoot JPEGs with the full intent of using them. What's more, if you shoot RAW alongside, then you can use the in-camera processing to apply many of the changes that make shooting RAW worthwhile, e.g. to correct for white balance errors, tweak image brightness, or adjust colors.

White balance

The example below was shot using Standard mode on a cloudy day, and the camera's automatic white balance rendered it quite cool. By adjusting the Raw file with a simple Cloudy white balance preset in ACR, we warmed things up a bit.

Original JPEG RAW file reconverted in Adobe Camera Raw

High ISO

Like the X-Pro 1, the XE1 delivers excellent JPEGs at high ISO sensitivity settings, to the extent that you don't really need to shoot in Raw mode from the perspective of applying noise reduction or sharpening tweaks. It's actually pretty hard to coax better image quality out of the X-E1's Raw files than you'll get out of the camera's JPEG engine. However, again, shooting raw does allow you to make changes to the color and tonal distribution of your images, something that can be very useful at high ISO settings. In the example below, we processed this ISO 6400 image with the aim of reducing the yellow color cast, and slightly lifting the shadows.

Original JPEG, ISO 6400 100% crop
RAW file reconverted in Adobe Camera Raw 100% crop

Overall then, the excellent quality of the X-E1's in-camera JPEG processing means that for many purposes it makes perfect sense to shoot JPEG+RAW with the full intent of using the JPEG by default, and only resorting to the RAWs when you want to pay an image special attention. You can also use the camera's own processing to make global tweaks to white balance and exposure for images that only need minor changes. Of course it's still best to use RAW for more extreme manipulations.

RAW files for download

Don't just take our word for it - take a look at the Fujifilm X-E1's RAW files for yourself, and run them through your preferred software and conversion settings. Here, we provide you with a selection of raw files of 'real world' scenes, and if you want to take a closer look at the X-E1's studio scene shots you can download original raw files from our 'Compared to (Raw)' page.

Previous page Next page
I own it
I want it
I had it
Discuss in the forums


Total comments: 17
Isaac Wood

This maybe a bit random but when shooting at the maximum fps will the X-E1 work better than the Fujifilm Finepix HS20exr because some of the shots i have gotten from my HS20 exr have been all right auto focus wise at the maximum fps for the sports that i take photos for which is the field events in athletics but im wondering if the X-E1 is better.


Hello, can you help me with deciding between FujiFilm X-E1 and Canon 600D with set lenses? Size and weight is no concern. Which camera has better image quality and which one is more versatile ?

Wojciech Sawicki

Between those two? The X-E1. With the right adapters (available all over e-bay and CHEAP) you can put many, many more lenses on it (including Canon...), especially old rangefinder lenses such as those made for Leica M or LTM/M39. there are absolute gems among these. The 600D will have better AF (especially tracking moving subjects) but for everyday shooting, the Fuji will do just fine. Also, you're saying size and weight don't matter? Trust me, you they will very soon :D So yeah, Fuji.

1 upvote

These are two very different cameras, regarding size, viefinder, and other things. Depends on what you need, and it's best to try them these reviews will cover specifications but quite often what matters to you might not be mentioned in reviews.

1 upvote

I have had this camera for almost 3 weeks already and I also can’t figure out how to set the minimum shutter speed when using auto ISO, can you shed a light on that?


1 upvote

I use the quick shortcut assigned to the Q (or Fn? The one next to the shutter button) button. There, you can quickly change the minimum shutter speed while using auto ISO.


With the new update, select "ISO Auto" by pressing the right (->) button on the d-pad
There you see the settings for the minimum and maximum settings, as well as the minimum shutter speed when under auto settings

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote

why was the X-E1 picture taken with a 35mm lens while MFT had the 50mm mounted and FF like A99 or 6D had 85mm???

1 upvote

The 35mm F1.4 and the 60mm F2.4 Macro (the only two normal / short tele primes at the time of writing) are about equally sharp at f/5.6 and f/8 (see and ). In addition, the 35mm doesn't exhibit much field curvature, unlike, say, the latter-released 27mm/f2.8 pancake (more info on this problem: )



Finally, now that the absolutely stellar (see ) Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 R is out, non-macro people able to shell out the double the price generally prefer it to the old 60mm F2.4. (Of course, this may not have been a point in choosing the 35mm over the 60mm back then. Nevertheless, we are pretty lucky to have a studio shot demoing the field curvature / sharpness of prolly the most popular Fuji X prime, and not that of one that has since been overshadowed by a newly released one.)


continuing my post . . .

I understand why Fujifilm designed the lens rings with those slim grooves for stylistic reasons, but I find myself frequently turning the wrong one because they all feel the same. I'll get used to it, but a rubber ring on the zoom would help. Also, the zoom ring is stiff and those little grooves are slippery. Rubber would help the grip.

I would suggest turning off the image display as the default is 1.5 seconds. The image display clogs up the EVF for 1.5 seconds making it impractical to follow action. It's in the menu under setup screen 2.

1 upvote

Had mine a short while, purchased in part due to this review.

A couple things worth mentioning in terms of this review. The exposure compensation dial on my camera has a very firm detent so there's no chance of an inadvertent movement of the dial. I've loaded body firmware 2.0 and 18-55mm lens firmware 3.0. According to Fujifilm, these updates are supposed to address a number of issues, including the slower focusing. I find the camera/lens focus speed to be quite good with this update in place.


Had my xe-1 2 weeks now and I'm blown away by the quality of the images taken with the kit zoom lens. The images could easily be printed at about 50" and are in practice comparable to my D800. AMAZING!
In use too I love it. The EVF whilst not as clear as an SLR viewfinder, tells me all I need to know and enables me to see all the menus without putting on reading specs. I use it exclusively in EVF mode. It is light and handles superbly. The image stabilisation seems incredible- so far, as good as the D800 shots from a tripod! If you're in doubt, go and buy one.


Can the back screen be turned off completely so only the electronic viewfinder is used for composing and shooting?

1 upvote

when you say ":but powering off usually cleared the error." can you expand a bit on that. Was there a different fix at another time?


What about shutter lag? Any appreciable delay from the time one pushes the button til the shutter actually releases?

Total comments: 17