Fuji RAW and Lightroom

[ianwatson]

Good afternoon all,

I am circling the idea of a Fuji X100V. The word is that Lightroom used to struggle with Fuji's RAW files. However, time has passed and Lightroom has been updated. I played with a couple of images that I downloaded from the internet. There doesn't seem to be any difference worthy of angst between Lightroom and Iridient Developer, which often received the nod as the best choice.

Would those more familiar with Fuji files please tell me what they think?

[pluton]

Lightroom user since 2007.  Fuji (16MP) user since 2013.
Color, contrast, and all the normal raw conversion parameters and adjustments work fine in Lightroom.
Lightroom (and presumably ACR) does just fine with Fuji X files with one exception: 
Certain files that depend for their impact on the accurate rendering of tiny, random, fractal-like details, such as thousands of small tree leaves on the ground, millions of sharply defined blades of grass in a wideangle shot, or sharply-rendered jagged rock surfaces will show the peculiar deficiency of the Adobe raw conversion, but only upon extreme enlargement. 
Repeat:  Only under extreme enlargement.  As in greater than an A2 size inkjet print.
For normal prints and web use, the odd detail rendering is not visible, period.
For the very few shots that may require it, the app Iridient Transformer X can be had for not much money.  In ITX, the Fuji raw file is converted to a DNG, then Lightroom can do the rest in the normal fashion. 
In general, the tiny detail issue is either not an issue, or less of an issue, in Iridient Developer, Photo Ninja, Capture One, and the built-in MacOS raw conversion, among others.
I have all of these, but use Lightroom for 99.9% of Fuji shots.

[Akira]

I won't argue with Keith, but Capture One Express Fujifilm can be had for free and decodes RAF fantastically with no hint of anything like "wormy artefacts".  I used X-E3 and X-T3 with the software and unsubscribed AdobeCC during that time.  X100V uses the same 26MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor.

[Akira]

I noticed that X100V shows some overheating issue.  That seems to occur only in a relatively extreme conditions and to be well manageable, though:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/global-news/2020/0511_3469872/

[MFloyd]

About a year ago I followed an official Fuji workshop around the GFX50s. All post production was treated with Lr, and I must say, no particular problem arose. The course was given by a sort of Fuji ambassador. So, I guess, from Fuji’s side, doing PP with Adobe should be OK.

Just my two cents.

[Luc]

The GFX50s had a Bayer sensor, not a X-Trans. The "problem" if any is processing X-Trans images with Adobe.

[MFloyd]

The GFX50s had a Bayer sensor, not a X-Trans. The "problem" if any is processing X-Trans images with Adobe.

I didn’t know about the Bayer sensor. I thought all Fuji were X-Trans.

[Luc]

I didn’t know about the Bayer sensor. I thought all Fuji were X-Trans.

That is a fully understandable misconception as Fuji promoted X-Trans a lot. Some of the cheaper XA/XT models and all medium format GFX models have Bayer sensors though.

[ianwatson]

Keith, thank you very much. That is just the insight I needed. A3 is plenty big enough for me and so there is no need to worry.

Akira, thank you for the suggestion. Capture One Express could be handy for the rare files that Keith mentioned. At that price, it is at least worth a look. (I already have Iridient Developer and Photo Ninja but why not?)

[Anthony]

 I find that LR is definitely inferior to Capture One, Iridient and Photo Ninja for Fuji X-Trans files. It is rare to hear of someone who has moved from LR to one of those programs move back.

As you have various convertors, plus access to the free C1 Fuji program, I suggest you try various Raf files and see which convertor you prefer.

[pluton]

I won't argue with Keith, but Capture One Express Fujifilm can be had for free and decodes RAF fantastically with no hint of anything like "wormy artefacts".  I used X-E3 and X-T3 with the software and unsubscribed AdobeCC during that time.  X100V uses the same 26MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor.

Oops...I forgot about C-1 11/Fuji.  Yes, works fine and free.

[ianwatson]

If I buy the Fuji then there is homework to be done 

Nevertheless, it is comforting to know that Lightroom, while perhaps not optimal, is not the disaster that some would have us believe.

[PeterN]

My 2 cents...

I just (quickly) compared the processing of Fuji X100V RAF files in LR Classic 10.0 and Capture One 20 and I could not see much difference. That was quite different a few years ago. Especially the colors in LR did not look good. So apparently Adobe has catched up. I can't say I prefer one over the other.

Each package has its pros and cons. Generally speaking, C1 renders Nikon files warmer and brighter compared to LR. The difference is less visible with Fuji X-trans files (well, on my screen).  If you have not invested yet in a specific solution, as suggested, trying what you like might be the way to go. If you already use LR/PS for other files, I would not bother switching. On the other hand, the free C1 solution might be tempting. It takes some time to get used to how C1 works but after a while, I am sure you will appreciate its power. One of the big advantages of C1 has always been its color editor but the latest version of LR has one too. Healing and cloning in C1 still has a way to go. Don't me wrong, I like C1 for its "out of the box" rendering of Nikon and Fuji files but it is not "better". Just different IMHO.

A program I really begin to like is DxO Photolab4 for Nikon files. Unfortunately it is not available for RAF processing.

BTW: If I recall correctly, the trick with sharpening Fuji files in LR is to use a different setting for the Detail slider to prevent weird artefacts. However, I can't recall the specifics. Perhaps the info is still available on the web.

[Anthony]

IMHO LR demosaicing of rafs is still inferior to C1 and Iridient.

[pluton]

BTW: If I recall correctly, the trick with sharpening Fuji files in LR is to use a different setting for the Detail slider to prevent weird artefacts. However, I can't recall the specifics. Perhaps the info is still available on the web.

Suggested starting Lightroom sharpening settings for X-Trans 16MP:
Amount: 17
Radius: 1.0
Detail: 74
Masking: 0
The basic idea is to be low on the 'Amount' and high on the 'Detail'. If you have the feeling to increase sharpening, increase the 'Amount' slider, but only a bit.  Going from 17 to 30 is a big dose of added sharpening. Don't know if this applies to the newer 26MP X-Trans sensor.