Thread: Fuji X-Trans RAW Converter Comparison: Lightroom 4.3 and Capture One (C1) 7.0.2

I have always used the in built converter in both the X100 and X-Pro1 and have found the files to be excellent. I am now thinking that it's time once again to dabble into the world of RAW seeing as the Xpro has such great dynamic range etc. I have been looking at C1 along side LR4 ( I have LR3) and it does seem to do a better job than LR. If C1 does Sigma DP raw files then I'm sold!!!

EDIT: Bugger, It does not do Sigma raw or the Lumix LX7 which is a bit poor I can understand not doing sigma files but I did expect it to do the LX7. Anyhoo I have downloaded the trial and so far the program does a very decent job on the X-Pro1 Raw files. It's not as nice to use as Lightroom but then I am not used to it yet. Shame it's over £80 more than Lightroom!

SP5 still generates the best X-Trans results for me.


DSCF7019 by ricopress, on Flickr

http://www.fujirumors.com/comparing-...-one-silkypix/

Amin had done an earlier post on SC about the RX100 (I think?) and how the more common image processors are automatically applying lens corrections and not having an avenue to remove those corrections on RAW files. In many wide lenses, this results in the corners being smeared a bit. Depending on the image you may not want or need those corrections. C1 lets you apply to whatever level, or to remove completely - those automatic corrections. My point is C1 has other benefits in RAW processing apart from it's abilities with RAF files.

Of course most people either use Aperture or Lightroom and prefer those tools because they know them, and while Fuji has communicated to those two companies what was needed to work with their files it has yet to happen. With Canon/Nikon/Sony holding the share of the market, Apple and Adobe are making business decisions based off the numbers. It is a shame for us (we want the big boys to fully support our camera's RAW needs), but it is a business reality.

Hats off to Fuji for doing something different, and for Silky Pix and Phase One (and others) that are meeting the needs of all photographers.

Of all the comparisons I have seen, I find this one the most clear cut. A simple image that contains complex structure, colour and light.

Additional thoughts on the X Pro 1 | Henry Smith's Cottage

Originally Posted by Pelao

Of all the comparisons I have seen, I find this one the most clear cut. A simple image that contains complex structure, colour and light.

Additional thoughts on the X Pro 1 | Henry Smith's Cottage

Stephen, I think he makes ACR/LR look poorer than it is by not processing "to taste" making use of all the tools in LR. As I tried to show in my example, the results are much closer if you use the available tools.

Originally Posted by flysurfer

SP5 still generates the best X-Trans results for me.

Do you mean Silky Pix 5? THe disc I got with my X-Pro1 is finepix 3.2. Will this be good? I don't mind the clunky UI but as long as it does a good job and saves me spending £180 on Capture one.

Originally Posted by Amin Sabet

Stephen, I think he makes ACR/LR look poorer than it is by not processing "to taste" making use of all the tools in LR. As I tried to show in my example, the results are much closer if you use the available tools.

Good point Amin.

Originally Posted by Ghosthunter

Do you mean Silky Pix 5? THe disc I got with my X-Pro1 is finepix 3.2. Will this be good? I don't mind the clunky UI but as long as it does a good job and saves me spending £180 on Capture one.

I like RPP on the Mac better than silky pix. It is free but talk about a crappy UI :(. It is Mac only though. I will most likely get c1 eventually. The main reason I am using RPP over LR is due to batch processing capability. Once u setup a raw default profile, u can take a bunch of raw files, drag and drop them on the RPP icon, it will automatically kick off the raw processing and save the new files for you (I use TIFF). Once that is done u can import it to your favorite editor (in my case Aperture) for final manipulation work.

I find RPP slightly better than Silky pix. Silky pix a hair better than LR. C1 is a slightly better than RPP in some cases but UI is so much better. I was lucjky enough to be part of beta trial. It turns out that the sw developers of c1 were the guys who initially did the photoshop stuff for adobe (they were bought by adobe).

Hope that helps
Gary

Originally Posted by Garylh

I like RPP on the Mac better than silky pix. It is free but talk about a crappy UI :(. It is Mac only though. I will most likely get c1 eventually. The main reason I am using RPP over LR is due to batch processing capability. Once u setup a raw default profile, u can take a bunch of raw files, drag and drop them on the RPP icon, it will automatically kick off the raw processing and save the new files for you (I use TIFF). Once that is done u can import it to your favorite editor (in my case Aperture) for final manipulation work.

I find RPP slightly better than Silky pix. Silky pix a hair better than LR. C1 is a slightly better than RPP in some cases but UI is so much better. I was lucjky enough to be part of beta trial. It turns out that the sw developers of c1 were the guys who initially did the photoshop stuff for adobe (they were bought by adobe).

Hope that helps
Gary

I have been playing with the trial version of C1 and it is good. I have also been playing with SilkyPix which gives pretty good results. I think I'll stick with SilkyPix for now as it does a good enough job and I never batch process so that's not a problem.It is a shame that this Fuji version of silkyPix does not process my LX7 Raw files.

I forgot to disclose that Phase One gave me a copy of C1 for review purposes!