Fuji vs Fuji
New member
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 2
Thanks Sebastian. I'll check that out and see how things launch. I didn’t realize X-Trans support was so new to the application.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
The “Best” X-Trans RAW Converter shootout
- Thread starter Kwick1
- Start date
Ergo607
Senior Member
Fuji vs Fuji
New member
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 2
No harm done. I was perhaps too flippant in my wording on the site. That was in part for comedic effect, which could very well have not been effective. ;-)
I take learning curve and the user experience into account though. While it’s true that I’m not spending more time in LightZone than I have to, I’m not simply moving arbitrary sliders around and calling it a day. I *am* trying to get something decent, again, in a reasonably amount of time.
I’ll look into some tutorials, but even after spending 5 seconds in a working build of RawTherapee, I can’t why anyone would opt for LightZone over it. RT looks fairly promising, especially for those who like to tinker.
andywhoa
Forum Enthusiast
I didn't even read the article. I use Lightroom for all my landscape photography. I've also printed large prints. No problems. This whole topic is a giant yawn now.
Interesting to see the difference. I started a similar thread a few months ago looking at some other things under linux.
The dcraw based solutions, such as LightZone had problems back then.
At that time there was no real viable option, so I ended up running Win in a Virtualbox, and I have tried out LR, PN and captureOne. I would say that PN does a better job then LR in some ways, but I still decided to go for LR based on a few other parameters
There is also an interesting develpoment with darktable. In a development version they support the x-trans sensor. Could be pretty cool, as the darktable has many tools.
The dcraw based solutions, such as LightZone had problems back then.
At that time there was no real viable option, so I ended up running Win in a Virtualbox, and I have tried out LR, PN and captureOne. I would say that PN does a better job then LR in some ways, but I still decided to go for LR based on a few other parameters
- Speed of operation, PN is significantly slower on my machine
- I like the option, to be able to select the Fuji film simulations
- Built in lens correction, with presets for the Fuji lens I have
There is also an interesting develpoment with darktable. In a development version they support the x-trans sensor. Could be pretty cool, as the darktable has many tools.
Eoanthropus
Well-known member
- Messages
- 249
- Reaction score
- 321
Yep, don't even read the article is undoubtedly the way to go. If you don't see it it doesn't exist. It's like people who get cancer -- biggest mistake they make is going to the doctor and finding out what's wrong.
Wonder why you bothered to read the thread?
5
57even
Guest
LR sharpening doesn't need at adjustment. For texture, the detail slider is far more effective. Again, it needs a slight adjustment, not a massive one.
Menneisyys
Senior Member
Citation: "LightZone in particular, and even OnOne’s Perfect Photo Suite 8 are poor enough that I may leave them out of the comparison for the rest of the images. The open source devs of LightZone are probably focused on Bayer sensors for now, and that’s fine, but it does mean that for X Trans sensors, the results aren’t good. Don’t even bother registering to download it."
Exactly my thoughts - see my earlier test report on it at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54291170 . It's plain useless for X-Trans.
Exactly my thoughts - see my earlier test report on it at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54291170 . It's plain useless for X-Trans.
The Davinator
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 24,707
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 37,836
I wish Rawtherapee had been on here as well. I find the detail equal to Irident, but with less sharpening artifacts and better color.
Hello,
Thank you for taking the time. I think it's great, people who find fault when someone does this kind of testing for free should do themselves.
Im awaiting my XT-1, coming to my doorstep today if all goes well.
Been concern that Adobes Raw converted and what comes with the Fuji i seem to range from not the best to horrible. Not being able to pull the best IQ and sharpness from Raw files. Or mudding it up just in opening the Raw files. Getting the so called water color effect on fine detail, trees, ect. As I intend to use the XT-1 for landscapes shooting. As well as general and travel shooting. Good to know that the issue is not a sensor flaw but the software of some of the Converters.
I think it's great you pinpointed the best Raw converters that give best sharpness and color/depth out of the box in default mode Than Being PN and Iridient.
I am not as sophisticated compared to many here.
In the past I used Raw Converters for the basics. Open, white balance, highlight recovery, perhaps auto curve, auto lens correction and some times sharping, some times not. Then go to stand alone for sharping or finnish work in Photo shop. So I appreciate the best out of the box solution.
Dave
Thank you for taking the time. I think it's great, people who find fault when someone does this kind of testing for free should do themselves.
Im awaiting my XT-1, coming to my doorstep today if all goes well.
Been concern that Adobes Raw converted and what comes with the Fuji i seem to range from not the best to horrible. Not being able to pull the best IQ and sharpness from Raw files. Or mudding it up just in opening the Raw files. Getting the so called water color effect on fine detail, trees, ect. As I intend to use the XT-1 for landscapes shooting. As well as general and travel shooting. Good to know that the issue is not a sensor flaw but the software of some of the Converters.
I think it's great you pinpointed the best Raw converters that give best sharpness and color/depth out of the box in default mode Than Being PN and Iridient.
I am not as sophisticated compared to many here.
In the past I used Raw Converters for the basics. Open, white balance, highlight recovery, perhaps auto curve, auto lens correction and some times sharping, some times not. Then go to stand alone for sharping or finnish work in Photo shop. So I appreciate the best out of the box solution.
Dave
DarnGoodPhotos
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
I shoot JPGs so I have no dog in the race, but I think your comparison would be far more valuable if you learned the software a little more. Certainly there are users of the programs who visit your site that you could learn from; put out a call for testers and give everyone the same RAW file. A program that has mediocre results from a noob moving sliders is very different from a program that has medicare results from a more experienced user.
DarnGoodPhotos
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
Menneisyys
Senior Member
Well, he's perfectly right about b10. It's plain useless, as has been proved in my comparative tests too.
Nevertheless, now that b11 is out, I'll test it and report back as soon as I'm on my 10.9 iMac (I couldn't install it under Yosemite beta).
I too think the sharpness from Rawtherapee is equal to Iridient. I also like RT for having a lot of functions.
I like the user interface of RT less however, for example:
1) using the magic mouse on my iMac over an image is a nervous experience as the zoom function is coupled to the scroll function of the mouse; I often get a change of zoom% unintentionally
2) comparing images at 100% takes a lot of steps, in LR this is much easier
3) I would like to move the sliders with large steps by keyboard like you can in LR and C1
Beat Traveller
Leading Member
- Messages
- 745
- Reaction score
- 415
Grand. I look forward to reading it.
Hello together, newbie here ;-)
darngood came up with with an idea so simple and nice, that I couldn't help but switch from reading only to first post (and believe me guys, I read dpr regularly for years now, reviews and forum)...
With Fuji vs Fuji having the ambition and the (nice to read) platform, but not the manpower to dive into all the possible converters in full depth, and with all the wonderful expertise gathered here around the world's best photo gear review platform... I'd so love to see what all of you (or us, just starting with rawtherapee and X-E1) can do with a small but wise selection of raws. There's so much bitching and disputing in forums with the core of dispute being held out of focus. Darngoods suggestion sounds just reasonable and productive. If Fuji vs Fuji would be up to the task, why not help him figuring out some rules which all of us agree to follow during the testing procedures, let him moderate and write about the findings - if such a collaboration would be suitable for the operators of dpreview, of course (who might even be interested in contributing?) ...
Point is, Xtransers had it a bit harder with raw processing and still love their system, right? From what I have seen in the last two nights playing with Sebastien's RT builds for WIN, I think it would be a shame if this very decent piece of software wasn't being explored, discussed and compared further in regard of Fuji Xtrans. Actually it all reminds me of the time we spent in real darkrooms with our daily prey back then, just less... dark.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum