How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?
1

Like the title says, how well does Fujifilm's (Silkypix) Raw File converter demosaic X-Trans files compared to LR's enhance detail, Affinity Photo, Capture One, etc.  Thanks.

Ysarex
Ysarex Senior Member • Posts: 2,778
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Silkypix makes an excellent raw converter. It holds it's own and compares very well demosaicing X-Trans raw files. What you get free with your Fuji camera is an older version of Silkypix Developer Studio.

lewiedude2
lewiedude2 Senior Member • Posts: 2,041
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Inukim wrote:

Like the title says, how well does Fujifilm's (Silkypix) Raw File converter demosaic X-Trans files compared to LR's enhance detail, Affinity Photo, Capture One, etc. Thanks.

Well, I think it works well as a converter only. What’s the purpose of the question - other than the obvious? Also, there are so many threads about this topic, and some even include silkypix in the discussion....but not many. That may tell you something. I use Iridient X Transformer and Lr/Ps.

 lewiedude2's gear list:lewiedude2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR
OP Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Ysarex wrote:

Silkypix makes an excellent raw converter. It holds it's own and compares very well demosaicing X-Trans raw files. What you get free with your Fuji camera is an older version of Silkypix Developer Studio.

Thank you for your reply.

OP Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?
2

lewiedude2 wrote:

Inukim wrote:

Like the title says, how well does Fujifilm's (Silkypix) Raw File converter demosaic X-Trans files compared to LR's enhance detail, Affinity Photo, Capture One, etc. Thanks.

Well, I think it works well as a converter only. What’s the purpose of the question - other than the obvious?

Can you explain what the obvious is?  Yes, I plan to use it as a converter only, if it works as well or better than the others.

Also, there are so many threads about this topic, and some even include silkypix in the discussion....but not many. That may tell you something. I use Iridient X Transformer and Lr/Ps.

I always hear about Affinity, Adobe, Capture One, but never the Raw converter that comes with the camera.  Many don't like the demosaicing algorithm of Adobe, and many praise Capture One, but not so much about Fuji's, which is why I bring up the question.  If this question about Fujifilm's Raw File Converter software has come up recently, then I apologize.

John Keiffer Regular Member • Posts: 122
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?
7

Inukim wrote:

lewiedude2 wrote:

Well, I think it works well as a converter only. What’s the purpose of the question - other than the obvious?

Can you explain what the obvious is? Yes, I plan to use it as a converter only, if it works as well or better than the others.

Also, there are so many threads about this topic, and some even include silkypix in the discussion....but not many. That may tell you something. I use Iridient X Transformer and Lr/Ps.

I always hear about Affinity, Adobe, Capture One, but never the Raw converter that comes with the camera. Many don't like the demosaicing algorithm of Adobe, and many praise Capture One, but not so much about Fuji's, which is why I bring up the question. If this question about Fujifilm's Raw File Converter software has come up recently, then I apologize.

Don't apologize, there's nothing wrong with your question.

-- hide signature --

John

 John Keiffer's gear list:John Keiffer's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon Coolpix A Fujifilm X30 Canon EOS 300D Sony a6000
oscarvdvelde Senior Member • Posts: 1,360
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?
1

Inukim wrote:

Like the title says, how well does Fujifilm's (Silkypix) Raw File converter demosaic X-Trans files compared to LR's enhance detail, Affinity Photo, Capture One, etc. Thanks.

I don't use any other converters than RFC and ART-RawTherapee.

RFC is good for standard shots, especially since HDR was introduced which at modest settings works well to get the shadows right, but it takes ages to update all parts of an image. But for night, high-ISO and underexposed shots it is poor. It gives a preview with good colors, which after a while are updated by dull color, even with noise reduction off. Especially if you want to push it a stop. You would have to compensate with saturation to 1.50.

 oscarvdvelde's gear list:oscarvdvelde's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Samyang 50mm F1.2 +4 more
McWoodley
McWoodley Regular Member • Posts: 354
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Inukim wrote:

Like the title says, how well does Fujifilm's (Silkypix) Raw File converter demosaic X-Trans files compared to LR's enhance detail, Affinity Photo, Capture One, etc. Thanks.

It has been a while since I have used it.  Does a fine job converting but extremely limited in features and capabilities when compared to capture one or LR.  As I recall the workflow was also seriously lacking. I used LR for a few years then switched to capture one.  Could not be happier. I just hope the version coming out has stacking capabilities for bracketed sequences.  Give silky a shot but I would compare it to the free version of capture one. If you prefer capture one then I would upgrade to the full Fuji version as layers are essential in good post processing.

 McWoodley's gear list:McWoodley's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T30 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 +7 more
Pixel8888 Regular Member • Posts: 452
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Inukim wrote:

lewiedude2 wrote:

Inukim wrote:

Like the title says, how well does Fujifilm's (Silkypix) Raw File converter demosaic X-Trans files compared to LR's enhance detail, Affinity Photo, Capture One, etc. Thanks.

Well, I think it works well as a converter only. What’s the purpose of the question - other than the obvious?

Can you explain what the obvious is? Yes, I plan to use it as a converter only, if it works as well or better than the others.

Also, there are so many threads about this topic, and some even include silkypix in the discussion....but not many. That may tell you something. I use Iridient X Transformer and Lr/Ps.

I always hear about Affinity, Adobe, Capture One, but never the Raw converter that comes with the camera. Many don't like the demosaicing algorithm of Adobe, and many praise Capture One, but not so much about Fuji's, which is why I bring up the question. If this question about Fujifilm's Raw File Converter software has come up recently, then I apologize.

Fuji supports it's users with 2 free somewhat stripped down raw converter versions:

the free Fuji version of silky pix (download from the Fuji website) and the free capture one version for Fuji (download from the capture one website).
Beside Fuji, also Sony and now also Nikon (quite likely financially) support the free basic capture one version.

With the free Capture One version registered you see the upgrade price to the Full Fuji version in your capture one user account. Don't know how long the -30% off Black Friday/Cyber Monday discount will last.

afm Contributing Member • Posts: 557
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

I use Cap1 express and would suggest it is the better option to Silky but they make you jump through hoops to get the free version.  As others have said there are a number of  alternative free options that are worth a try.

a_c_skinner Forum Pro • Posts: 10,603
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

They all work. The current iteration of Adobe works OK, though it needs different sharpening settings from those used for other raw files I am told. I've not tried Adobe.

Capture One is good, works well and is easy to use as a batch converter to TIF if you want to work with another image editor. Affinity works well except when altering highlights and shadows a lot, when I find it produces an unpleasing result. All its image editing features work well, but I don't use it to convert raws. RawTherapee is said to be very good, but I've just failed (again!) to get to grips with its user interface. People say it is very good. Silkypix works OK but I didn't care for it's UI. One of the things I wanted was easy to use batch conversion for panorama stitching and I find Capture One easy and intuitive.

With the exception of Affinity's big highlight and shadow adjustments and Adobe needing very different settings, provided you avoid these, you won't see a huge difference, it is down to the UI, which you can try out.

Fuji have some software that allows you to plug in your camera to your computer and use the in camera hardware to convert RAWs. I've not tried it.

Affinity

Capture One

Just rough and ready; only highlights and shadows changed, colours become muted in Affinity.  OTOH Affinity has left the skyline without the odd emphasis C1 has given it.

Now to waste another morning on RawTherapee!

-- hide signature --

Andrew Skinner

 a_c_skinner's gear list:a_c_skinner's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +5 more
OP Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Thank you to everyone who has replied.  I will definitely look into all the options.  Again, thanks for the great information.

OP Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

a_c_skinner wrote:

They all work. The current iteration of Adobe works OK, though it needs different sharpening settings from those used for other raw files I am told. I've not tried Adobe.

Capture One is good, works well and is easy to use as a batch converter to TIF if you want to work with another image editor. Affinity works well except when altering highlights and shadows a lot, when I find it produces an unpleasing result. All its image editing features work well, but I don't use it to convert raws. RawTherapee is said to be very good, but I've just failed (again!) to get to grips with its user interface. People say it is very good. Silkypix works OK but I didn't care for it's UI. One of the things I wanted was easy to use batch conversion for panorama stitching and I find Capture One easy and intuitive.

With the exception of Affinity's big highlight and shadow adjustments and Adobe needing very different settings, provided you avoid these, you won't see a huge difference, it is down to the UI, which you can try out.

Fuji have some software that allows you to plug in your camera to your computer and use the in camera hardware to convert RAWs. I've not tried it.

Affinity

Capture One

Just rough and ready; only highlights and shadows changed, colours become muted in Affinity. OTOH Affinity has left the skyline without the odd emphasis C1 has given it.

Now to waste another morning on RawTherapee!

I do like the image processed with Capture One better.  I think it also has less distortion.

baobob
baobob Forum Pro • Posts: 15,644
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

RFC EX3 deserves consideration Despite a rather rustic UI, RFC IMO is able to manage and reduce nois in noisy files remarkably leading do sharper results

I always use it with difficult (not perfect) files

It also works fine with bushes and foliage especially with sharpening avoiding .....worms

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

 baobob's gear list:baobob's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus Tough TG-4 Panasonic ZS200 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X-T3 +10 more
OP Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

baobob wrote:

RFC EX3 deserves consideration Despite a rather rustic UI, RFC IMO is able to manage and reduce nois in noisy files remarkably leading do sharper results

I always use it with difficult (not perfect) files

It also works fine with bushes and foliage especially with sharpening avoiding .....worms

Thank you.  The "worms" are a concern to me, and I do not oversharpen, so I will give RFC a try.

Doug MacMillan Veteran Member • Posts: 3,272
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

What are you using now?

Most of the time I use Adobe Camera Raw.  As mentioned, it has really improved with Fuji RAW handling, especially if you leave sharpening to downstream.

SilkyPix does do a good job at RAW, conversion, but then I take the TIFF into Photoshop for real editing.

While I'm here, I'll give a shoutout to Topaz, especially Sharpen AI and DeNoise AI.  They do a great job. DeNoise has sharpening in it as well, almost making Sharpen redundant. Their GigaPixel product also is great.  I have files taken with a Canon G2, my first digital camera, and running the files through GigaPixel allows me to print a size larger than just using the native resolution.

 Doug MacMillan's gear list:Doug MacMillan's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm X-H1 Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM +9 more
a_c_skinner Forum Pro • Posts: 10,603
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

+1 for Topaz Sharpen and Gigapixel.  I'm debating buying denoise, being from the silde generation I rarely push ISO beyond 400.

-- hide signature --

Andrew Skinner

 a_c_skinner's gear list:a_c_skinner's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +5 more
OP Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

Doug MacMillan wrote:

What are you using now?

Most of the time I use Adobe Camera Raw. As mentioned, it has really improved with Fuji RAW handling, especially if you leave sharpening to downstream.

SilkyPix does do a good job at RAW, conversion, but then I take the TIFF into Photoshop for real editing.

While I'm here, I'll give a shoutout to Topaz, especially Sharpen AI and DeNoise AI. They do a great job. DeNoise has sharpening in it as well, almost making Sharpen redundant. Their GigaPixel product also is great. I have files taken with a Canon G2, my first digital camera, and running the files through GigaPixel allows me to print a size larger than just using the native resolution.

I was using Adobe camera raw, however, I wanted to change to something without a subscription.  Thank you, I will take a look at all the options.

OP Inukim Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?

a_c_skinner wrote:

+1 for Topaz Sharpen and Gigapixel. I'm debating buying denoise, being from the silde generation I rarely push ISO beyond 400.

Thank you, I will take a look at those options.

CAcreeks
CAcreeks Forum Pro • Posts: 16,092
Re: How well does Fuji's Raw File Converter work compared to third party?
1

Inukim wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

They all work. The current iteration of Adobe works OK, though it needs different sharpening settings from those used for other raw files I am told. I've not tried Adobe.

Capture One is good, works well and is easy to use as a batch converter to TIF if you want to work with another image editor. Affinity works well except when altering highlights and shadows a lot, when I find it produces an unpleasing result. All its image editing features work well, but I don't use it to convert raws. RawTherapee is said to be very good, but I've just failed (again!) to get to grips with its user interface. People say it is very good. Silkypix works OK but I didn't care for it's UI. One of the things I wanted was easy to use batch conversion for panorama stitching and I find Capture One easy and intuitive.

With the exception of Affinity's big highlight and shadow adjustments and Adobe needing very different settings, provided you avoid these, you won't see a huge difference, it is down to the UI, which you can try out.

Fuji have some software that allows you to plug in your camera to your computer and use the in camera hardware to convert RAWs. I've not tried it.

Affinity

Capture One

Just rough and ready; only highlights and shadows changed, colours become muted in Affinity. OTOH Affinity has left the skyline without the odd emphasis C1 has given it.

Now to waste another morning on RawTherapee!

I do like the image processed with Capture One better. I think it also has less distortion.

You mean geometric distortion? If I were you, I would download and learn the free version of Capture One, and be happy. The Affinity image above has muddy colors. For comparison:

GIMP edit of Affinity image: Auto WB, increase cyan saturation

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads