Jump to content

Recommended Posts

New member...Roger....First Fuji X camera (x100V)

Long term user of Canon (5Diii,7D,various compacts) and a long-term user of RAW in Lightroom.

Excited with the X100V and new to me the film simulations.   JPeG quality, etc....excellent stuff!

Question:   Is the Fujifilm X RAW studio essential to workflow?  For exports, I am converting to

JPeG anyway from LR.   Yes, I can appreciate using the in-camera processing....but, your opinion is appreciated.

Do I really  need it?

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you don't... You may want to shoot RAW+JPEG to get an in-camera JPEG with your favorite film simulation next to the RAW file. LR allows for Fuji film simulations, but they're not very close to Fuji's in-camera engine. Capture One has very good Fuji film simulations. I've been told Fuji and C1 have worked together on those. You can download a C1 for Fuji Express for free or a C1 Pro as a 30-day trial. Highly recommended, not only for the film simulations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are looking for a low cost approach, you can get very good results with DarkTable, Capture One (Fuji Express version is free), RawTherapee or the Fujifilm supplied Raw File Converter EX V3.0  <-- the name is close but it is different than the Raw Studio application. Each one has their benefits as well as learning curves. The Raw File Converter EX V3.0 comes very close to matching Fuji's in-camera engine.

Each of these will give you the option to convert the RAF files into TIFF or JPEG files as you wish as well as giving you quite a few development options.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never even installed the Fuji apps except for the new Webcam app (and that's not even on my processing rig).

My workflow is Capture1 or Capture1+Photoshop.

I'll admit I've yet to be impressed by LR's results from Fuji RAW's, but for a long-time LR user I'd focus on that unless you really find yourself disappointed in the results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

There’s another reason not to depend on Fuji’s X Raw Studio. It only allows you to process raw files captured by the exact same type of camera with which the shot was made. When you upgrade your Fuji camera to a newer model you can’t process the raw files made with the older camera anymore. So moving up from an X-Pro2 to an X-Pro3 and your older files can’t be processed in XRaw Studio... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

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...