Thread: Fujifilm X-Trans RAW (RAF) processed in Capture One 7.0.2 Beta vs Lightroom 4.2

This evening I installed Phase One Capture One 7.0.2 beta and ran some test with Fuji X-Trans RAW files in comparison with Adobe's Lightroom 4.2. The test was simple, I grabbed an existing RAF file, imported and exported it in LR4.2 and CO7.0.2b. Then I took the same file and added some extra sharpening and exported it again. No other edits were done.

Flickr guest pass to the entire set here: http://flickr.com/gp/tdp_photos/nh4426/

UPDATE: I've been shooting through the week and testing various files between these two pieces of software, images will be added to the set above as I go along. While I understand certain types of images accentuate the problem with RAF files in LR, I'm not trying to create those situations (example: I could walk 2 minutes to the edge of the jungle and take a shot that is 100% vegetation, push the sharpening a bit and LR would destroy that shot. I don't take 100% jungle shots so why bother...). I'm just shooting like I always do, things I shoot the way I like to shoot. Also when I do actual edits to images in LR/C1 for this test, I state when I made edits. Some files are just in and out, some I edit to try and get the result I want. I also completely understand people that are more than happy with their current workflow and have no intention on changing anything. I'm not trying to sway a person one way or the other I'm just showing what results I'm getting with the two pieces of software on my photos taken with a Fuji X-E1.

I have not added Silkypix to the mix (LR vs C1 vs SP) because for me, Silkypix is far from being usable software.

This is the test image:


CO 7 beta default sharpening by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

Here are some side by side close up results with CO on the left and LR on the right and default settings:


DEFAULT CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


DEFAULT CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


DEFAULT CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


DEFAULT CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


One thing I have noticed with X-Trans RAW files in LR is you can't sharpen them much before the image becomes swirled and painting-like. This didn't happen with CO7b. Here are some after I did what I would consider normal sharpening for this shot. Again, CO is left and LR is right:


MORE SHARP CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


MORE SHARP CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


MORE SHARP CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


MORE SHARP CO7b left LR4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

I've not used Capture One software before but it is all self explanatory. It opened, zoomed and edited Fuji RAW files much faster than LR4.2. I would say CO and LR are both about the same for ease of use, not something I would say for Silkypix.

Computer
13" MacBook Pro
Mac OS X 10.7.4
2.3 GHz Intel Core i5
8 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
120 GB SSD

Flickr guest pass to the entire set here: http://flickr.com/gp/tdp_photos/nh4426/

Cool, definitely gives them a bit more pop and clarity. I think they're onto something here, but its honestly not something I'd see without looking at 100% crops, so not something I'd switch applications for given that I use a few different cameras and don't want to have markedly different workflow for each. I'll probably still shoot jpegs on the Fuji anyway - I just like them that much. Raw for everything else I shoot, but I've never been able to improve on Fuji jpegs, even when I was shooting the X100's standard sensor which didn't have any issues with raw processing at all...

-Ray

Thanks for posting the test.

My photography doesn't often cover subjects where the challenges with LR exist for Fuji files. I have seen some of the smearing, but not to a problem degree. In this test I don't see a difference that would validate adding C1 to my workflow. But I will wait and see more tests, especially of foliage heavy landscapes , where there can be an issue.

I think the release of the XE1 and the X100 successor will also up the pressure on Adobe - as will the C1 release.

There are some results with more foliage over here:

http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php...release/page-2

Another pair, full sized screen cap here: http://flickr.com/gp/tdp_photos/8Tyzy8


C1 7.0.2 beta left, LR 4.2 right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

I can see a difference especially on the last two. However I prefer the more muted colors and better highlight control of LR from these examples. I assume that one could reduce the highlights in Capture One. That is one of the best things about the Fuji sensor is the ability to retain an enormous amount of detail in highlights. It's better than my D700. Now I doubt it will outdo the newer FF cameras but it's still amazing from an APSC size sensor. One reason I like prefer the Fuji are the colors. I have been shooting RAW files with it for a while and converting in LR. I'm not sure I'm that unhappy with the results. I usually don't do any processing to them. They are almost always perfect right out of the camera. However, I will be following the Capture One. If would have no problem learning to use a different software. I already have LR (for the Fuji's X Pro, X100, and S5) and Aperture (which is actually better for the Nikon). Really they aren't that hard to use. I can't imagine that Capture One would be that hard.

I wish Fuji would make a FF X Trans. I guess that would require new lenses but I'd definitely buy one. If there was a FF version of the X Pro with 28, 35, 50, and 85 that would be my only camera. Please Mr. Fuji!!!!

C1 left, LR right by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

Now on this one I have to go with the Capture One. I'm am very intrigued. I have a feeling I'll be buying this software. You can still see the highlight difference on the yellow cab but that's splitting hairs and kind of silly. Thanks so much for taking the time to post this. I REALLY appreciate it!!!!!!!!

Thanks for this. I downloaded Capture One Pro 7 a while back and am still testing it. Between its treatment of x10 files and the ability to turn off automatic lens correction, I'll almost certainly by the Capture One. Version 5 was my main raw processor for a while, and I always liked the software.

Jumping back and forth between the two pieces of software on these files, LR 4.2's slowness with Fuji X RAW files becomes more apparent. Also C1 seems to have more features than LR, yet LR is a bit more logically laid out. I have not read any user guides for C1 but I think you can customize what tools are where for the overall layout. When I get more time I will dig into it.

When I import Fuji X RAW files into LR auto crops to 16:9 and I have to tell LR to crop it to "original" aspect ratio. I then highlight all the files and tell it to sync. I'm not sure why it wants to crop the files, it must be something in the way LR reads X RAW file codes. C1 doesn't do this.

Dragging the highlight slider all the way to the left in LR pulls more highlights back than the same exercise in C1 (but in C1 you drag it to the right). Also, LR is stronger in pulling out shadows. In both cases C1 does good enough (to me) and LR can take you into surreal HDR mode if you aren't careful.

Originally Posted by tdp

Jumping back and forth between the two pieces of software on these files, LR 4.2's slowness with Fuji X RAW files becomes more apparent. Also C1 seems to have more features than LR, yet LR is a bit more logically laid out. I have not read any user guides for C1 but I think you can customize what tools are where for the overall layout. When I get more time I will dig into it.

When I import Fuji X RAW files into LR auto crops to 16:9 and I have to tell LR to crop it to "original" aspect ratio. I then highlight all the files and tell it to sync. I'm not sure why it wants to crop the files, it must be something in the way LR reads X RAW file codes. C1 doesn't do this.

Dragging the highlight slider all the way to the left in LR pulls more highlights back than the same exercise in C1 (but in C1 you drag it to the right). Also, LR is stronger in pulling out shadows. In both cases C1 does good enough (to me) and LR can take you into surreal HDR mode if you aren't careful.

Interesting notes. Thanks for taking the time. The differences are more apparent to my eye in your later posts.

I have read that some people want to retain LR as their main catalogue and editing tool, and will do basic RAW conversion in C1 and then import a TIFF into LR for finishing.

I'm looking forward to more comparisons and reviews.