Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Recently made the switch from Nikon to the XT3. My Nikon post workflow ( Bridge / CS5) will not work with the XT3. Looking to replace with similar workflow to avoid learning an entirely different system.  Any thoughts would be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, KellyL said:

Thinking the same  just wanted to make sure that was the best option 

You'll get a lot of different opinions as to the "best" option unfortunately. Its going to be a balance between how much you want to pay, how much you are willing to learn new software and whether each option provides the functions you want.

There are some who have had trouble with processing Fuji X files with Lightroom - if that is a concern you might try the Adobe DNG raw converter route for a while and see if you like the results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of discussion on this.  Bottom line XT-3 files are handled fine by Adobe if you have a current version.  I have heard a large number of complaints about the subscription model, but it does work and it is what I use.

I also see a large number of Fuji users moving to Capture One as it does do a nice job with Fuji RAW files.  Adobe treats X Trans files as if they were Bayer sensor files causing noise and artifacts.  I have found if I use C1 import defaults as a preset to import into Adobe then Lightroom works just fine.

Most is a matter of personal preference.  I have tried and learned how to use most software options out there, but I started in Lightroom and I am comfortable in it.  So I figured out how to make it work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, dennisfriesen.me said:

Can you please explain how this works?

I first tested by importing an image (actually tested several) into C1 and Lightroom, then looked at the defaults.  I  did need to make corrections for the different scales, but I found two items making the big difference - sharpening & Noise Reduction.

1. Sharpening was set to roughly 18 by C1 compared to 40 in Lightroom.  Although I've learned since C1 will adjust sharpening based on image ISO. It is still roughly 18-25 compared to 40 in Lightroom.  As I understand it X trans sensor files will be sharper than Bayer sensor files so Lightroom defaults add too much sharpening (causing the artifacts & worms).  Lightroom is geared for Bayer sensor files - not X Trans.

2. Luminance/Color (Noise Reduction) in C1 is set to 50 every time, while Lightroom is set to 0.  C1 for Fuji adjusts Noise Reduction to compensate for the extra sharpness of the X Trans file.

I found if I import to Lightroom with the C1 defaults - that is a preset setting Sharpening to 20 and Noise Reduction to 50 I can work with my image in Lightroom much the same as with C1 and the results are the same.  I am much more comfortable in Lightroom so this is works very well for me.  C1 for Fuji is geared for X Trans files - you simply need to adjust Lightroom away from the Bayer sensor and more towards the X Trans sensor.

Actually what's best though, is to import into Lightroom with a preset Sharpening & Noise Reduction both set to 0.  I make all the global adjustments I want being cautious with contrast, texture, & clarity as those tools do increase sharpening.  Then I adjust sharpening and add masking as necessary (use ALT key).  If necessary (High ISO images) then I'll add Noise Reduction feeling free to go all the way up to 50 if necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2020 at 2:47 PM, Lumens said:

Actually what's best though, is to import into Lightroom with a preset Sharpening & Noise Reduction both set to 0.  I make all the global adjustments I want being cautious with contrast, texture, & clarity as those tools do increase sharpening.  Then I adjust sharpening and add masking as necessary (use ALT key).  If necessary (High ISO images) then I'll add Noise Reduction feeling free to go all the way up to 50 if necessary.

Thanks!

Also the "details" slider in Lightroom should be set to 0. I think it's at 25 by default. That slider is causing those annoying wormy artifacts...

Edited by dennisfriesen.me
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dennisfriesen.me said:

Thanks!

Also the "details" slider in Lightroom should be set to 0. I think it's at 25 by default. That slider is causing those annoying wormy artifacts...

I think I do that when I shut down the the Sharpening & Noise Reduction I'll have to check when I get home.  If I remember correctly I move all the sliders in those categories to 0.

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
    • I discovered this unmarked government installation today.  

      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!

×
×
  • Create New...