X-Trans advantages - fact or fiction ?

Started Feb 21, 2014 | Discussions thread
Aethon Regular Member • Posts: 320
Re: X-Trans advantages - fact or fiction ?

Dennis wrote:

mr moonlight wrote:

There's only a handful of RAW processors that do very well with Fuji's RAW files and Aperture isn't one of them. ... With Fuji's X-trans RAW files, unless you're using the likes of C1 or Irident, your not maxing out what you can achieve with the X-trans RAW files.

Sometimes I read hear that the raw issue is overblown (like in the memes and trolling thread), and yet this seems like confirmation of what I've read in the past that would give me pause over buying into it. Not an issue, because I'm not shopping. But hopefully it will all get straightened out at some point. It's amazing that Fuji can put such a competent jpeg engine in firmware, but not provide the algorithm to 3rd party raw processors.

Good grief. This is the Zombie Idea that WILL NOT DIE!

The RAW issue is overblown at this point. Lightroom's processing was poor but is now absolutely fine. Aperture is actually superb.

C1 and Iridient may offer a teensy-tiny improvement (a technical term, obviously) but at the expense of a more complicated workflow in exchange for minimal gains. This is exactly the same way that some people also use those same processors for Bayer files. It's a matter of taste.

Again: Fujifilm RAW processing is no longer an issue. And Aperture processing X-Trans files extremely well.

Die, zombie. DIE!

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow