DPR review review

Started Mar 1, 2013 | Discussions thread
rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 26,472
You are right
2

That's it, it's worth repeating: anyone getting a 1400 USD camera will likely use RAW and would profit from that. Dealbreaker, no need to go further. RAW is horrible, at all ISOs, detail is gone.

wildkat2 wrote:


Image Quality (RAW) - The Fuji RAW files can't properly process in Lightroom or ACR (even with the update). They have to be converted using the proprietary RAW processor or shot JPG. That is why the Fuji got better RAW scores.

You're massively over-stating things here. The Raw conversion isn't quite as polished as for Bayer sensors (a 20-odd year head-start can do that), but they're pretty good, as I'll demonstrate later.

That RAW conversion is an issue with this is a big deal. Anyone spending $1400 for a camera probably shoots RAW. Yes it got better this week but its still not up to standard.

-- hide signature --

Renato. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ OnExposure member http://www.onexposure.net/ Good shooting and good luck (after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
ET2
ET2
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow