===== Update 2018-01-07 =====Lightroom raw development and Fuji raw developmentI have received numerous comments from Fuji fans telling me that the X-Pro2 would have performed so much better if only I had used the right software.So, I took my X-Pro2 and had all images developed in camera by Fuji‘s own raw converter.Here is what I found:- Fuji applies more sharpening than Lightroom.- Fuji applies far too much noise suppression for my taste, particularly in the high ISO images. Up to a level where they lose a lot of detail.- The colors are very much like they were in Lightroom. All of the magenta tint is still there. The red car still has a horrible orange hood. There is a slight improvement in color saturation.- I could not find additional details in highlights and shadows.- The spokes of the windows are still overblown and the slight blue halos are still there.- Bokeh hasn‘t changed at all.- I could always match Fuji’s processing in Lightroom by a little tweaking of the sliders. - There was just one area in just one of the shots (the steering wheel of the red car) where I found a notable improvement in Fuji‘s raw processing. But even there it was easily possible to match Fuji’s development in Lightroom nearly 100%.- There are a number of shots where I like the genuine Lightroom processing better than Fuji’s development, for example the shot with the altar and the Bible and also the other high ISO shots in the monastery. Fuji hasn’t rendered more details in the highlights but their shadow details are worse.My conclusion: The notion that Lightroom is bad at developing Fuji raw files may have been true six years ago when the X-system was new. Today, it is just an internet myth like so many others.On this basis I have decided not to make another comparison video. The reasons are:I am totally sure Fuji fans would immediately tell me that the new results are still unfair as I have not been using their favorite raw editor or I should try this or try that.Tweaking just the Fuji files would be unfair to Leica. So I would have to start tweaking the Leica files as well - and that would be opening an even bigger can of worms. Nothing would be ‚fair‘ or ‚comparable‘ anymore - for no side.Finally, all the tweaking has brought the Fuji/Lightroom images just marginally closer to the original Leica images.Lightroom is the market leading raw editor and a reference for all others. If Adobe still had big problems with Fuji‘s X-system after six years (they don’t), Fuji should do something about it and work with them.Both cameras are terrific and produce great pictures, as I already said in my video.I do not want to make a new video with a negative ending where I only have to prove that Fuji‘s own raw development isn‘t any better than Lightroom‘s. The X-Pro2 performed admirably well against a camera and lenses four times it‘s price. Fuji fans will simply have to accept the fact that the Leica gear is still a bit better.But that‘s not all. I am providing a download link to a number of screenshots of side by side comparisons. See for yourself, how much better Fuji‘s raw development is than Lightroom’s:https://www.dropbox.com/s/yoyo6mzhasg...Have fun comparing :-)Martin---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I have been shooting 128 images at different locations with both cameras and the equivalent 50/90 mm lenses (XF35 and XF56 versus Summilux 50 and Summicron 90). In this review, I will present some of the results and compare the image quality.

タグ: leica-m10, fuji-x-pro2, summilux-50, summicron-90, xf-56, xf-35