For me, it's an absolutely HUGE improvement...brings the X-trans files in-line with the way ACR processes all other cameras, which to me looks very natural and non-digital. Just a giant leap in fine detail rendering and lack of artifacts.

Way to go Adobe...glad I held off buying C1....

Jman13 wrote:
For me, it's an absolutely HUGE improvement...brings the X-trans files in-line with the way ACR processes all other cameras, which to me looks very natural and non-digital. Just a giant leap in fine detail rendering and lack of artifacts.

Way to go Adobe...glad I held off buying C1....

Now this is good to hear!!!

Jman13 wrote:
For me, it's an absolutely HUGE improvement...brings the X-trans files in-line with the way ACR processes all other cameras, which to me looks very natural and non-digital. Just a giant leap in fine detail rendering and lack of artifacts.

Way to go Adobe...glad I held off buying C1....


Thank you so much for the update Jordan, I am downloading LR now .

Just got the camera last week. Love it so far. All shot with X-E1 with ZM 50mm planar with minimum or no PP.

1.


2.


3.


4.

Well, I'll be....


They Did It - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 Summicron & Speedbooster [LR4.4] by brodyl.91, on Flickr

Adobe got their shit together, it looks just as good as C1 I'd say.

I am re-posting the sunset photo that I posted several days ago (my first photo with my X-E1 with my Leica R 35-70 f4 Vario Elmar zoom lens). These were done quickly. The first was done through LR 4.3 and the second by LR 4.4.

Rich

You still need to pull down exposure a fair bit. You've blown the red channel pretty severely here...it may not be recoverable.

X-E1 with Canon FD 50-300mm f/4.5L and Canon 2x TC @ 600mm, f/16. Branches in the moonlight:

Jman13 wrote:
You still need to pull down exposure a fair bit. You've blown the red channel pretty severely here...it may not be recoverable.

The image is underexposed and I didn't have time to use a reverse ND. I will post the original file as a JPEG. I don't have enough knowledge or experience at this point.

If you want to give it a shot, I would be interested in what you can do with this.

Rich

Here's one photograph of my nephew. Had shot this a while ago, went back to process it today. To be honest, the SOOC Jpeg was so good that I didn't bother processing the RAW. Yeah, the BG sucks, I should probably have managed it a bit better .

naturephoto1 wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
You still need to pull down exposure a fair bit. You've blown the red channel pretty severely here...it may not be recoverable.

The image is underexposed and I didn't have time to use a reverse ND. I will post the original file as a JPEG. I don't have enough knowledge or experience at this point.

If you want to give it a shot, I would be interested in what you can do with this.

Rich

I'll give it a shot, but I can't do anything with a JPEG version...I'd need the RAW file to try and extract some detail in the blown channels.

Jman13 wrote:
naturephoto1 wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
You still need to pull down exposure a fair bit. You've blown the red channel pretty severely here...it may not be recoverable.

The image is underexposed and I didn't have time to use a reverse ND. I will post the original file as a JPEG. I don't have enough knowledge or experience at this point.

If you want to give it a shot, I would be interested in what you can do with this.

Rich

I'll give it a shot, but I can't do anything with a JPEG version...I'd need the RAW file to try and extract some detail in the blown channels.


Jordan,

OK. I only reduced the RAW file to a JPEG to upload the file. All of the information should be there to the best of my knowledge. If you can't work from that, how do I upload a RAW file to the forum?

Rich

PMed

You did blow the red channel a little bit too much for full recovery of data, but I got a lot more out of it. In lightroom, the highlight and shadow recovery sliders are your friends. The X-trans RAW files are calibrated so that they don't have quite as much highlight headroom as some other cameras, but the files have huge dynamic range, which means you can push the shadows a TON...so err on the side of underexposure. The red channel also clips a little earlier than the green and blue on this sensor. Wish Fuji would put in an RGB histogram.

Anyway, here's what I got with a few quick adjustments on the RAW:

Here's a couple more from LR4.4 & the Speedbooster using the Leica-R 35/2 (E55)


Background - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Viberg - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Sick Fro Bro - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Arriving - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Holy Mirrorshot - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Wired - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Nanana - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Finished - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Fish n' Chips - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr


Statue - Fujifilm X-Pro1 w/ Leica-R 35/2 by brodyl.91, on Flickr

Jman13 wrote:
You did blow the red channel a little bit too much for full recovery of data, but I got a lot more out of it. In lightroom, the highlight and shadow recovery sliders are your friends. The X-trans RAW files are calibrated so that they don't have quite as much highlight headroom as some other cameras, but the files have huge dynamic range, which means you can push the shadows a TON...so err on the side of underexposure. The red channel also clips a little earlier than the green and blue on this sensor. Wish Fuji would put in an RGB histogram.

Anyway, here's what I got with a few quick adjustments on the RAW:

I decided to go back and try my hand at this image again of the Sunset in front of my house in Pennsylvania taken with the X-E1 and my Leica 35-70mm f4 Vario Elmar lens processed with LR 4.4. I increased the vibrancy a slight amount more, opened up the shadow a slight amount more and increased the contrast a little.

I think that I like this rendering.

Rich

Well, DpReview compared the new Lightroom candidate to Capture One and out-of cam Jpg's here: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1550547764/adobes-fujifilm-x-trans-sensor-processing-tested

Looks like LR is now much much improved, and has less artefacts than CaptureOne. LR may look softer, but really has higher resolution than CaptureOne. Silkypix 5 still has the least artefacts and the highest resolution, but LR has so much better highlight and shadow recovery, better user interface etc. A step in the right direction, perhaps it will be tweaked even further before full release?

Please, PLEASE, Apple-- give us RAW support. Shooting jpgs and editing in Aperture works fine (or at least I think my samples show that), but I'd love to get even more DR headroom via RAW, and not have to set up parallel workflows for my cameras.

LR4.4