BIG FUJI – X – FALL SAVINGS!
XF 56mm f/1.2 (save $150): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29326 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
XF 23mm f/1.4 (save $200): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29325 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
XF 14mm f/2.8 (save $200): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29329 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
XF 35mm f/1.4 (save $100): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29327 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
XF 60mm f/2.4 (save $150): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29331 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
XF 10-24mm (save $200): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29324 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
XF 55-200mm (save $150): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29332 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
X-T1 body (save $100): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29330 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
X-T1 + XF18-55 (save $100): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline / [shoplink 29328 ebay]kenmorecamera[/shoplink]
X100S (save $200): BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama /Pictureline X-PRO1 + 18mm (save $300):Â Adorama / X-E1 + 18mm (save $300): Adorama / X-M1 + 18mm (save $300): Adorama / X-E2 + XF18-55: Adorama
RAWTHERAPEE
Over a month ago FR-reader Dean told me that Rawtherapee added a preliminary support for X-TRANS RAF files. But it was still a early support, so we decided to wait for the final and stable version before sharing this news on Fujirumors… and now the day has come.
You can download Rawtherapee ver. 4.2.1 (not for Yosemite) 100% free at their download page here. For the press-release click here.
Now it’s up to X-shooters to give it a try… test it and feel free to drop your comment down below.
52 Responses
A pity it’s a 100% not free ( 0% free ) 😛
Eh, what?
In the first version of the article there was a type and it said 0% free… instead of 100% free… I was pointing that out (not being so literal :P)
Raw Therapee is and will always be a free program, learn to GNU gpl…
RawTherapee4.2 vs CaptureOne8 vs Lightroom5.6 (sharp=50):
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yvkqkcdrcw9jxoh/AACYdMCllVw1U14mEHvhIJZPa?dl=0
MJr thanks for that – Seems to me that RT is doing a pretty good job – details are present – Granted there are a few artifacts – but I find it is sometimes a bit better than CO or LR sometimes less good – obviously demosaicing Xtrans is not that simple. What’s your take ?
At default settings you dont get an optimal image, actually very far from that. You must play with Detail/Noise reduction to achieve its true potential. It’s on par or better and certainly more capable of fine tuning your image than the other top of the shelf software. Im used to Capture One but was able to match its output in about 10-15 of using Raw Therapee and I considered Capture One the best for fuji files. Cheers.
Well i think that there aren’t many photographs where the absolute maximum detail is that important. Just needs to be correct and free of artifacts. I am often a pixel-peeper myself but it’s things like color, micro-contrast, white-balance and levels that i find most important.
I like to keep it as natural as possible, without losing punch, and
that means the processing engine and a clean starting point is very
important so that it doesn’t fall apart after editing.
I do care about detail too, but not so much about sharpening. In the
comparison i did it to match the ‘potential’, but usually i even lower
the default sharpening.
But possibly
above all, the workflow, interface and management need to be intuitive. I don’t want to be editing one image at a time, but process a whole card at once without losing overview.
These are all things that LR seems to do best (for me) at the moment, even though it really is far from perfect and even buggy. I want to hate it but i just can’t, maybe i’m just used to it. ^.^
Doesn’t launch. It says it’s not osx 10.10 compatible
I’m with you. Can’t seem to get it to work on Yosemite either.
Yeah. I checked the other link. They say it’s compatible till 10.9. only.Too bad.
That’s what you get for being an early adopter. I always wait six months or so before upgrading. Not because of compatibility problems though, but just because I’m slow. 🙂
The so called early adopter is not the problem. The problem is with a company that does not take advantage of early versions to start developing their software. Literally scores of software companies had already upgraded their software by the time 10.10 was officially released.
Have spent a few hours trying it out in all areas of raw development and I must say: Very very impressive. It is kinda ultra tweaker/nerd friendly in the sense that there are so many detailed controls but by playing with it I was able to achieve incredible results. The Noise Reduction section is VERY powerful and I believe this gets the most detail out of XTrans with incredible ability to fine fine fine tune the results 🙂 Im kinda used to Capture One 8 look and its workflow but will definitely keep this program, highly recommended to those still looking for the ultimate xtrans developer, this cant be beaten and I have tried every other option. It might be outclassed by a better workflow or interface (actually its a pretty well thought out and designed program) but the output is top.
WOW at black and white tool, didn’t see that coming! Simply outstanding control! The more I explore this program the more I love it. My hat off to the developers!
Supposedly free tool have shills? Interesting.
been using for a month right now…kicks adobes as#$@s all the way…
Certainly not in the usability department… But I’m looking forward to digging deeper into it.
well, its free, what would one expect? better rendering and also usability, workfloe and etc..? a little too much, dont you think?
You’ve got big knowledge about TP. You also post that in FUJI-Xforum. But still no images shown by you. Can you prove your statements please.
‘Raw the rapee’…could have named it better….just saying…
RawRaper, because thats what it does.
Raw terror pee?
Lots of controls, but the de-mosaicing sucks for X-Trans. Horrible patterns appear if you start to push the pixels.
Couldn’t agree more. I didn’t find any better detail than I currently get with Capture One Pro 8. For RAF files, that is my choice.
We have been using it for well over 4 years now, also using development versions on all cameras we own and owned …. it is an impressive piece of software, which we certainly prefer to Adobe Lightroom and Capture One which we own. Very recommended …. interface is different, but certainly as friendly or as unfriendly as Lightroom or Capture One.
X-Trans raf file si very hard to read! I appreciate this company and its effort to try to read it better but it’s lost war. Fujifilm have to develop its RAF reader. Many friends of mine don’t buy fujfilm for these problems.
Yeah, but that’s not a a solution for the future. What happens when Fujifilm decides not to continue development of that software? We are talking about your digital negatives and they should be readable in 10, 20 or 70 years from now. The solution is for Fujifilm to switch sensor technology. X-trans offers no apparent benefits as is right now. It was develped to help fight moiré in a sensor without an anti-aliasing filter. Other makers have proved that with todays high MP bayer sensor cameras those problems are pretty much non existant.
Get rid of the X-trans snake oil Fujifilm!
I actually use Fuji because of the X-Trans …. I think many others do, if you have looked at the last polls. And I have no problems in demosaicing …. am I the only one????
I find the images produced with the X-Trans sensor to be very pleasing – and it is this “Fuji quality” that made me switch from Nikon to Fuji. Nikon produces technically superb images but almost clinical w/o “soul” (for lack of a better word with my limited command of the English language)
I am very on the fence. I have a X100 with the bayer sensor, and LOVE the results. I think fuji should develop a raw converter. One that we can do the basic edits and then export as a tiff. I sure as hell won’t be reediting my raw files in 20years time….Why would you if you’ve got the photo you want out of it…?
but Fuji has already developed a raw converter …. at least it came with my camera ….
Nar it’s just an old version of SilkyPix software isn’t it? IMO they need to make a mac/pc version of their internal camera raw converter. That works brilliantly
Keep the X100. It’s a damn fine camera after the FW update. I wish I hadn’t sold mine.
Oh don’t worry – I’m keeping this forever!
Using both a Nikon & Fuji workflow, I encounter a bit the same issues. It has become a nightmare to find a common workflow for both systems. None of the major convertors allows me to combine both systems without running into quality issues. Contrary to what most people think, Lightroom, C1 or Aperture, they all have quality and conversion artifacts and only the standard manufacturer’s software allows you to deliver/develop the full results the native sensors deserve. But I don’t want to go along with tools like Capture NX-D or Silkypix. I keep on saying what Fuji has created with the X-trans has been one of the worst technical implementations ever. How credible is it to design a CFA that no standard software vendor can demosaic in a decent way? But a lot of of Fuji-fans seem to care more for the silver or black trim of their camera, than for the technical competence of the sensor and the too complex and unpredictable workflow related to it (… I’m afraid it’s just OOC jpeg for most of them). What’s good in this sensor is completely ruined by the fact NONE of the mainstream convertors is able to perform artifact-free RAF-convertions while the true resolution is just average for a 16MP system. Close to perfect is not good enough for such a premium range of cameras. I bought into Fuji X 2.5 year ago, but with the knowledge and experience I have now it’s very possible I’d keep on my FF DSLR solution only, Cheaper when you look at the longterm investment, better performance, more flexible, more reliable and most of all, with a decent market and also native manufacturer support (I experienced unfortunately Fuji’s after sales org is virtually inexisting). To Didiergm below and his ‘Fuji quality’ remark vs. Nikon… I don’t know what gear you use from Nikon, but no way – really no way – Fuji’s APS/C technology beats the recent Nikon FFs in quality and look if you use the right and most premium glass (which isn’t cheap either) and follow a decent workflow. If you compare it with entry level amateur stuff maybe you’ve got a point since most DX-range lenses deliver quite mediocre quality, but that’s unfair to do so, Fuji presents the X-series as an advanced, pro-market oriented range of cameras. Over 70 years I can tell you I won’t be blogging anymore 😉 but – seeing how much Fuji cares about good RAF-conversions, it’s my fear too that even over a few years market support for older RAFs will get problematic unless a miracle happens. While I can still convert my D70 NEFs in the most perfect way.
@LCN If I may expand on the ‘Fuji Quality’ remark and this is /my/ take on it, your own opinion may differ and I respect that and also believe this is a good thing. I loved the results I got from Nikon’s D70, D1x, D2Hs, D2x and D3. From then on (D3s, D800, D4) I find the results to be technically perfect – and if I was in the business of documenting things (like sports, photo journalism, architecture or studio and the like) I’d very likely still be using those bodies along with high end lenses – but too “clinical”
Being a mere amateur in the business of looking for pleasure in photography I find the overall package Fuji provides – From taking the picture (and lugging around the gear) to publishing and/or printing the few images that possibly deserve it – to be far far more pleasurable than with my former gear. In short using Fuji gear and lenses and seeing the results I get gave me back the pleasure I once had back in my film days and wet lab which I almost lost using the recent Nikon offering. And for this I am happy. What else can I ask from a camera system ?
I understand and accept that other people may think differently and or have different feelings.
Yeah…that’s just what David Hobby, Kevin Mullins, Zack Arias, and the dozens or hundreds of pro’s using these cameras were just discussing! How they suck so badly during raw conversion and how they should change everything!
Oh wait…that’s only for online pixel peepers….my bad.
It is the same kind of people whose equipment ceases to function the day the sucessor hits the shelves.
Maybe you can advice on the precise workflow to avoid all the Fuji-typical issues, problems with greens and skin colors, colour artifacts creating non existing colour flairs in certain areas, the loss in true detail & resolution? Oh yes, sorry, it’s not important because even many of your pros just shoot jpeg, well I don’t and I have serious reasons for that. Developing pictures is for me of the same importance as it was in the analogue era.
I know peeps that make great (and well paid) conceptual photo art with 7 year old Canon compact cameras. I’m that last one to say that impressive cameras makes impressive art. But, I’m also the first one to say that there are a lot of mildly impressive pros out there. Both Arias and Hobby are two of them, to me. They are sponsored marketers more than photographers and I always recommend that people should look elsewhere for inspiration when exploring photography.
I know peeps that make great (and well paid) conceptual photo art with 7
year old Canon compact cameras. I’m that last one to say that
impressive cameras makes impressive art. But, I’m also the first one to
say that there are a lot of mildly impressive pros out there. Both Arias
and Hobby are two of them, to me. They are sponsored marketers more
than photographers and I always recommend that people should look
elsewhere for inspiration when exploring photography.
Except that the base conversion engine is dcraw and is open source, in development without the aid of Fujifilm, and you can do what you like with it because open source. You have the converter in your hands if you want it. If you don’t like XTrans, don’t buy it. Simple.
Yeah, dcraw is open source and it makes the files “forever” (as long as there are C compilers) readable. That doesn’t mean dcraw gives a good results out of the box or that it offers a reasonable workflow though. If mayor software vendors fail to get excellent X-trans output with the help of dcraw, how could I hope to develop a software that could do this?
I don’t like X-trans and I haven’t bought it just yet (although I have an X100T on order). That doesn’t mean I can’t discuss these issues though. That’s one of the uses for these kind of camera tech sites, isn’t it?
Certainly can discuss issues, I just didn’t realise that accusing Fujifilm of peddling fraudulent products (i.e. snake oil) was a discussion. Either way, there is open source software out there as well as a range of closed source products that seem to do a rather good job of developing .RAF files. I’m hoping that RawTherapee will continue to be developed over time for at least some of those 70 years as well as the other products. It’s hard to say what will happen that far in the future, but if you are that risk averse, perhaps Xtrans isn’t for you 🙂 (and I say that as a discussion… feel free to disagree!)
I agree. I just tested it compared to the in-camera converter, and the results are better using the in-camera converter.
What about Fuji expanding the possibilities of its in camera processor? Wider Dynamic range settings, EV4 to EV-4, maybe even a basic tone curve preset? I’m guessing this can be done via firmware?
Am I the only person who thinks this would be a good solution? I would further ask Fuji to offer us the ability to save image as TIFF so we could (if required) edit the image further in an external processor once the best basic conversion has been done in camera….which may actually be enough for most users. My request for in camera improvements would be;
1. Wider shadow and highlight recovery settings.
2. Wider exposure compensation to EV4 – EV4-
3. HDR option?
4. Serveral Tone Curve presets.
5. Sharpening presets.
6. Ability to save image as Tiff.
Maybe i am completely mad suggesting this, but it would be a good solution, I think….!
I have been suggesting it for about a year now, but nobody has shown interest until now. Hopefully people keep expressing the need for in-camera TIFF conversion or a bare-bones raw converter, as Fuji needs to take notice of this issue.
Because of this, and the exceptional image quality from my DP Merrills, I use my X-Pro one less and less everyday.
Just 2 quick hints for testing RawTherapee:
1) Before you start pixel peeping in RawTherapee, make sure that you set the parameter “false color suppression steps” for the X-Trans demosaicing. The highest value seems to be appropriate in general, but increases computation time.
2) I found that color noise reduction (NOT luminance noise reduction!) can compensate artifacts, appearing as some kind of color shades (or haze … whatever you might want to call it). I actually observed the same in tools like PhotoNinja. Here it also makes sense to reduce color noise.
I’m not a RT expert. I made these observations in darktable and found that it improved results in RT as well.
There is a developer thread on https://code.google.com/p/rawtherapee/issues/detail?id=2547 Some guy compiled this: http://filebin.net/kznleag8qy which works fine on my iMac under 10.10
This is the type of software where the intensions are good, but the usability as a real professional tool is very questionable. Do you want to depend on RawTherappee, Iridient or any other kind of free/open source/shareware kind of software to built a photography/archiving future on? In my eyes, it only points to the miserable fact that the mainstream packages still have: they suck in the RAW-conversion quality of quite a few cameras but not a lot of people seems to care. Not only for Fuji, unfortunately. A lot of people – even professionals – have built their realm on jpgs, nothing more. Strange, invest several 1000s $/€ in gear and not care for the last chain in the photography process. I