Ok, Fuji...You win. I'll shoot JPG! ;-)

[xuser101]

I've been shooting raw (like that frizzy hair guy on YouTube) for a long time now.  Nikon, Olympus, Sony, Panasonic, an older Fuji (X-Pro1 and X100S) and maybe another brand I forgot ;-)...but I've always been shooting raw since I discovered editing in Lightroom (version 1).  I've always been more happy with raw since it was much easier to adjust white balance, push/pull shadows/highlights and various other reasons.  Mostly for flexibility and highest image quality.  

 

Well, after about a year and a half with the X-T1, I think I'm finally going to shoot JPG only (except for rare occasions).  Why?  I just can't replicate (in Lightroom) the great color and tones I get straight from the camera.  I've tried for awhile now to tweak the Adobe provided camera profiles to my liking, but they always seem to have too much contrast and the color just isn't quite the same.  

 

Adjusting white balance in Lightroom?  The X-T1 has the most accurate auto white balance I've seen from a camera.  I previously gave that nod to the Olympus E-M1.  So, adjusting white balance for my Fuji files isn't as important anymore.  

 

Recovering highlights or lifting shadows in Lightroom?  That's not as important anymore either because I've editing the in-camera settings to my liking so that I don't have really harsh shadows or highlights.  I can tweak a little here and there as I see fit for the JPG files in Lightroom.  

 

I went outside around my yard and garden and snapped some examples over the last day or two.  I'm very pleased with the images straight from the camera and with a few mild edits in Lightroom.  These are all from the 56mm and 18-135mm.  Some people badmouth the 18-135 being just an average lens at best, but I think it's excellent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[oldfashioned1536]

Thanks for the post. I've been considering the switch as well. Would you mind sharing your sharpness, dynamic range, shadow settings?

[xuser101]

Thanks for the post. I've been considering the switch as well. Would you mind sharing your sharpness, dynamic range, shadow settings?

Thanks.  

Provia

Sharpness = 0 (I mildly sharpen in Lightroom)

Highlights = -2

Shadows = -1

Color = 0

Noise Reduction = -1

[Red G8R]

Those are great samples of Fuji's colors. I too only shoot JPEGs.

[darknj]

If you havn't done so yet, try changing the DR to 200, that would bump the ISO to 400 but it's hardly an issue with that camera, I believe you will be pleasantly surprised by the deeper range of colors.

[val]

Some examples of straight out of camera JPEGs from me

DSCF2037 by Will Solis, on Flickr

 

DSCF4648 by Will Solis, on Flickr

 

90mm F2 Fujifilm! Straight out of camera by Will Solis, on Flickr

[Aswald]

Nice jpegs!

 

Have you tried Raw File Converter EX2 by Silkypix? I am getting as good results or as near as jpegs.

[xuser101]

If you havn't done so yet, try changing the DR to 200, that would bump the ISO to 400 but it's hardly an issue with that camera, I believe you will be pleasantly surprised by the deeper range of colors.

 

Good point.  I toyed with DR settings when shooting raw, but maybe there's really no affect to the raw files and it only really applies to the in-camera jpg files.   I'll give DR 200 a go this weekend.

[darknj]

Unless my eyes are cheating me, none of the changes you do affects your JPEGs, including the DR settings. but the outcome from the camera is really lovely and enjoy them quite a lot.

[xuser101]

Nice jpegs!

 

Have you tried Raw File Converter EX2 by Silkypix? I am getting as good results or as near as jpegs.

 

I have heard about the other raw converters, but I really love to use Lightroom for absolutely everything since it makes everything quicker and easier for me.  

 

By the way, I still do minor changes to the photos once I import into Lightroom.  The photos I post always have SOME type of change to them, whether it be slight white balance change, a bump in saturation or other minor things like that.

[marcelo_valente]

I shoot JPEG + RAW but almost always edit the jpeg a bit and keep the raw just in case.  The good thing about shooting jpeg+raw is that if you shoot black and white, you will always have the raw file if you want a color version of the shot.  If you go with just jpeg when shooting black and white, that's all you get.

[Mike Dunbar]

I have two X-E1s which I use professionally for fine art photography.  Except for an initial experiement when they first arrived, I've never shot anything but jpgs with them.  The Fuji jpgs, colours, contrast are better than I can produce in Lightroom even after much tweaking.  I just apply a fine art preset to finish them the way I want them.  So they save a lot of time and the file sizes are great to work with. 

 

Now if Fuji would just go full frame or medium format...

[darknj]

 

 

[...]

 

Now if Fuji would just go full frame or medium format...

I am part of those that thinks Fuji should not go full frame, they are doing mighty good on the cropped sensor, it strikes a very good ratio between size and quality.

Medium format, maybe. Full frame, not that big of a jump to be worth the time and effort.

[Mike Dunbar]

I am part of those that thinks Fuji should not go full frame, they are doing mighty good on the cropped sensor, it strikes a very good ratio between size and quality.

Medium format, maybe. Full frame, not that big of a jump to be worth the time and effort.

Thank you, it is incredibly interesting to learn what you think Fuji should do.

[darknj]

Thank you, it is incredibly interesting to learn what you think Fuji should do.

 

Oh by all means, there are no need to use my words, I can use those of Takashi Ueno in this interview. Is that sufficient or do you have further doubts ?

 

Or are you actually having an issue in the APS-C and FF sensor fight ? Please again, don't take my words, allow me to use those of someone else, is Zack Arias a proficient enough ProTog for your taste ? I believe he had a few things to says on the subject of APS-C vs FF.

[CRAusmus]

The Jpeg's are good, but it's my understanding that RAW shooters don't shoot RAW because the Jpeg's are bad.  They shoot RAW because they don't want the compression, and the settings locked into the file like the Jpeg's are.

 

Or am I just missing something?

[darknj]

The Jpeg's are good, but it's my understanding that RAW shooters don't shoot RAW because the Jpeg's are bad.  They shoot RAW because they don't want the compression, and the settings locked into the file like the Jpeg's are.

 

Or am I just missing something?

 

I shoot both out of sake of security, if I mess up my exposition on the Jpeg, I can always use the RAF file.

 

But really, every single time I take a look at the Jpeg files out of the camera, it really makes me wonder why I am spending time to lightly retouch my pictures to begin with.

 

Let's play a game, the Fuji regulars will find it quickly but can you tell which side is processed RAF and which is the Jpeg directly from the camera ?

 

[marcelo_valente]

 

But really, every single time I take a look at the Jpeg files out of the camera, it really makes me wonder why I am spending time to lightly retouch my pictures to begin with.

 

 

My thoughts exactly.  I guess...out of habit.

[SirMaxRu]

I shoot both out of sake of security, if I mess up my exposition on the Jpeg, I can always use the RAF file.

 

But really, every single time I take a look at the Jpeg files out of the camera, it really makes me wonder why I am spending time to lightly retouch my pictures to begin with.

 

Let's play a game, the Fuji regulars will find it quickly but can you tell which side is processed RAF and which is the Jpeg directly from the camera ?

 

I think that left side is raf, but not sure.

Though, the main reason to shoot in raw not only details. WB settings, exp corrections, shadow recovery, etc. all of this thing is more powerful with raf.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CRAusmus]

I'd go with the left side, but they look like they have been processed differently.  If you chose a film setting for the jpeg, why didn't you process the RAW to look as close to that setting as you could?  Have you ever seen those contests that one of the preset companies puts on?  I think it's Mastin, where they post an image and you are supposed to guess which one is film, and which one is processed?

 

And this still doesn't address my statement.  I never said the jpegs were bad.  I said you shoot RAW so you don't get the compression of the jpeg, and you have more latitude with processing.  However I also shoot RAW+Jpeg.

[darknj]

Left side is actually the Jpeg file.

 

I didn't really wanted it to look like the Jpeg, I processed the right side RAF as it would be pleasing to me and noticed how damn close the Jpeg was, which makes me wonder why I spend time processing my pictures to begin with.

 

I didn't knew they had constest for that, thanks for the pointers. It gives me something more to look at.

[CRAusmus]

Left side is actually the Jpeg file.

 

I didn't really wanted it to look like the Jpeg, I processed the right side RAF as it would be pleasing to me and noticed how damn close the Jpeg was, which makes me wonder why I spend time processing my pictures to begin with.

 

I didn't knew they had constest for that, thanks for the pointers. It gives me something more to look at.

 

The left side I just see more blue in the whites and the blacks.  That's what was pulling me toward the left, as I felt it had been processed less then the right.  Guess I was right on that part, but not on the fact that it was the RAW.

 

At any rate, the jpegs are good.  the color is good, the files are nice, but I choose to shoot both, and process the RAW files.  I am however fairly new to shooting RAW, so the novelty of it may wear off soon and I may be in your camp as well, but I still feel as though I would shoot both.

[Patrick FR]

Bart Simpson should try a Fuji Camera one day

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[milandro]

With all due respect, for what I see depicted here on this forum and elsewhere on line... I think that most of us produce pictures for which Jpeg’s straight out of the camera offer already more than what they really need ( or in some cases deserve!).

 

Nevertheless it is nice to keep the raws for “ just in case” the question is whether every user is THEN capable to do any better than the camera does.

[Dis]

I shoot RAW because I don't want to worry about too precise exposure, correct WB, film simulation, dynamic range etc while shooting. I can set all these in post. I set as much settings to auto as the shooting conditions allow me and just shoot. I want to think only about the picture I am taking.

I know myself: I'll definitely forget to set something what's not set to auto. That's also the reason I love EVF: it makes me sure I've not forgotten to change my exposure settings when I have to shoot in manual or when I've reached the limit of my auto parameter such as 1/4000, maximum aperture, ISO range.