What software do you use for Processing Fuji RAW files?

Puckman wrote in post #17489304
I appreciate you taking the time to write the longish post for my benefit. Thank you. I might try exactly what you suggested.
My biggest concern so far with the Fuji system has been the lack of established long glass (I do love the occasional foray at 400mm to capture a hummingbird, or whathaveyou. At least, I like having that option if I want it). That and the crop vs FF dilemma.
But that's all really a personal thing and I can't expect you or anyone else to have the answer for me.

Mostly, I wanted to hear that you are having a good experience with Fuji. No showstoppers with using the XT-1 (like "It's unusable" kinda thing). And no major complaints with the Fuji glass? Good IQ?
Since you mention manual focus glass. How do you find the ease of use of MF on the XT-1? I imagine it's made easy with focus peaking and the EVF (something the Sony guys rave about as well). I know I'd almost never try to MF on my 6D (unless I was shooting a landscape, where you can be off by a bit). It's just too hard to do with no visual aids. So curious how you're liking those manual lenses.

The MF aids work really well on the X-T1, but Sony may have the edge in that department. Here's a video comparison - https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=eC4lZWHDE58. The only adapted lens I'm currently using is an old FD 50/1.8 and it's not the sharpest tool in the shed. I am however, able to focus confidently with it on the X-T1. Sold nearly all my Canon glass last year to fund a X-T1 as a more travel friendly kit and no regrets. My other option was a 6D, but didn't want to lug around the heavy glass. Kept my 7D and 70-200 for sports.

As for post, I'm using LR 5.7.

Puckman wrote in post #17489304
I appreciate you taking the time to write the longish post for my benefit. Thank you. I might try exactly what you suggested.
My biggest concern so far with the Fuji system has been the lack of established long glass (I do love the occasional foray at 400mm to capture a hummingbird, or whathaveyou. At least, I like having that option if I want it). That and the crop vs FF dilemma.
But that's all really a personal thing and I can't expect you or anyone else to have the answer for me.

Mostly, I wanted to hear that you are having a good experience with Fuji. No showstoppers with using the XT-1 (like "It's unusable" kinda thing). And no major complaints with the Fuji glass? Good IQ?
Since you mention manual focus glass. How do you find the ease of use of MF on the XT-1? I imagine it's made easy with focus peaking and the EVF (something the Sony guys rave about as well). I know I'd almost never try to MF on my 6D (unless I was shooting a landscape, where you can be off by a bit). It's just too hard to do with no visual aids. So curious how you're liking those manual lenses.

This thread seems to have drifted off topic, but I will answer since you asked:

Focussing manual lenses in XT1 is a LOT easier than on the Canon - try focusing your lens with live view in 5x mode - its easier than that, because on XT! you can program the EVF and the Rear Screen (Independently) to show two windows - main window/view and a smaller one next to it - with magnified view of the focusing square / focus point. Add to that the ability to show peaking. ( https://kjetilkvienmad​sen.files.wordpress.co​m …ual-fra-iphone-ok-cs5.jpg )
However, even with all the above advantage, manual focusing is difficult with moving subjects, such as kids, birds or anything else in motion, so autofocus will always have a huge edge. With static subjects, its relatively easy.

APS-C has an advantage if you shoot with longer lenses due to the crop factor.

One other thing which i am loving about XT1 - the ability to see the image exactly as it will be, before actually taking the shot.

Here is a shot of my son from last month taken with a Fujinon EBC 50mm 1.4 lens @f1.4 (Its a manual focus M42 Lens) - as you can imagine, he wasn't completely stationary. SOOC jpeg - resized

Again, thanks for the replies guys. I know I took the topic off its original path. The Fuji section on this site is pretty small and it was nice finding someone who already went through the thought process I am currently going through. Again thanks.

On the topic of raw Fuji files. I am using LR5.7 (latest version). and it works just fine. I think everything looks great, colors are solid and I am able to tweak exposures quite a bit (shadows, etc). I subscribed to CC against my better judgement last year, but I have to admit it has been very nice being able to have access to the latest LR and Photoshop on a constant basis. Beats having to shell out of a new version of LR once a year or so (assuming new cameras need to be supported, etc, so staying with old versions isn't always viable).

After a while of not being satisfied with the way LR rendered my raw files (especially compared with those of my previous camera, a Nikon D610), I got Iridient Developer on the Macbook I allegedly got for school only (not anymore, I guess!).

The amount of detail I get out of ID is much better than that I get with LR, so I do lens corrections, fix exposure/highlights/sh​adows, and sharpness adjustments in ID; I then export as TIFF, and import into LR for cataloguing and further edits. A bit more laborious, sure, but it has also made me more selective of what I import in the first place.

If you don't have a Mac, Capture One 8 does a great job with RAF files from what I hear. I tried it but did not want to spend time learning new software.

I use Adobe PS Elements 13 with no problems. PSE12 also worked fine. Was using PS4, but for no reason I know of quit recognizing the .RAF files.
Perfect Photo Suite 9 also will open and process the Fuji raw files.

Capeto wrote in post #17563543
After a while of not being satisfied with the way LR rendered my raw files (especially compared with those of my previous camera, a Nikon D610), I got Iridient Developer on the Macbook I allegedly got for school only (not anymore, I guess!).

The amount of detail I get out of ID is much better than that I get with LR, so I do lens corrections, fix exposure/highlights/sh​adows, and sharpness adjustments in ID; I then export as TIFF, and import into LR for cataloguing and further edits. A bit more laborious, sure, but it has also made me more selective of what I import in the first place.

If you don't have a Mac, Capture One 8 does a great job with RAF files from what I hear. I tried it but did not want to spend time learning new software.

+1 As a lover of Lightroom I was so disappointed to see how it dealt with Fuji RAF files. Iridient ID is far superior and my landscape/seascape images are so much cleaner and sharper with it. I must admit the images initially look a bit flat with ID but I would rather deal with that than have to look at the mush that LR does with them. The demosaicing effect of LR is awful and ID deals with this. Come on Adobe, sort it out. Just take the trial with ID and you will see its instant advantages. I was going to sell my X-T1 and go to Sony when I saw the LR results. Thank goodness for ID, the X-T1 is no longer for sale. Try it !!!!

I started using LR CC and I like the results. I prefer Classic Chrome calibration on raw that LR provides. Sharpening between 25-45 with detail slider at 100 works great.