May 042012
 

Adobe has announced an update to its Camera Raw and DNG Converter plug-ins.

ACR 6.7 will be the last update of Camera Raw for Photoshop CS5. Fortunately, most of the cameras that have appeared on my radar in recent months as possible purchases are supported, namely Canon 1DX, Canon 5D Mark III and Olympus E-M5 OM-D. The one notable exception is Fujifilm’s X-Pro1.

Canon 40D and Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro. ©Calvin Palmer 2012. All Rights Reserved.

The absence of RAW support effectively brings the curtain down on my interest. Sure, the X-Pro1  comes with Silky Pix to handle RAW images. I would love to meet the marketing executive who came up with the name Silky Pix. It would be better named Silky Pants because its performance is regarded by many photographers as being just that — pants!

What version of ACR will eventually support the X-Pro1 is anyone’s guess. It does mean, however, that for someone like myself, if I were to buy the X-Pro1, I would also have to factor in an extra $199 to upgrade my version of Photoshop.

As much as I genuinely admire the image quality the X-Pro1 produces, I still cannot get past this cameras quirks and foibles.

The absence of the X-Pro1 from ACR 6.7 also coincided with an assessment by British photographer David Taylor-Hughes as to its usefulness as a camera for street photography.

Now if you idea of street photography is a photograph of random strangers doing nothing particular out of the ordinary or the photograph of a homeless person asleep in a doorway then the X-Pro1 will do just fine. But if street photography means capturing a decisive moment or a fleeting expression then, according to Taylor-Hughes, the Fujifilm X-Pro1 isn’t up to the task.

On his blog SoundImagePlus, he concludes:

So, I can’t say that I recommend the Fuji X-Pro 1 for fast reaction photography in a crowded constantly changing environment. Try as I might, I couldn’t get it to do what I wanted, and I tried virtually everything to see if I could get it quicker, but failed.

He commends the image quality of the X-Pro1, as most photographers do, but what use is fabulous image quality if the camera cannot deliver the shot the photographer had in mind?

No doubt photographers will be quick to point out that my assertion is wrong or that Taylor-Hughes needs to hone his skills and it is not the camera’s fault. Whatever!

Canon 40D and Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro. ©Calvin Palmer 2012. All Rights Reserved.

I am grateful to a photographer like Taylor-Hughes for giving an honest assessment and one based on personal experience.

Don’t get me wrong you will see street photography shots taken with the X-Pro1 and they really do come alive because of the image quality, particularly at a high ISO. But look at them a little more closely and many of them are capturing a static subject. And for those who do manage to capture a shot with motion, the photographer will rarely disclose how many attempts he had to make before getting the shot.

As Taylor-Hughes states, he did get some successes but also missed out on a lot of shots that other cameras would have taken in their stride and delivered the goods. And it is the inconsistency of the X-Pro1 that may lead to frustration and missed photo opportunities.

Talking of missed opportunites leads me to the M-mount adapter for the Fujifilm X-Pro1. It was the announcement that the X-Pro1 would be compatible with M-mount lenses that really fired my interest in the camera.

But where is it?

Third party manufacturers have got M-mount adapters in the marketplace. Now unless the Fujifilm adaptor offers something above and beyond what the third-party manufactures can offer, they may well have missed the boat. If Fujifilm’s M-mount adapter is only comparable to those of third-party adapters, people are unlikely to ditch the third party-adapters for the Fujifilm version, are they? Although a great many people who buy cameras seem to have more money than sense, so maybe Fujifilm does know what it is doing.

Time will tell.

  7 Responses to “Adobe brings down curtain on my interest in Fujifilm X-Pro1”

  1. Still trolling out the negative FUD on the Fuji I see – at least you’re consistent…

    Blaming Fuji for the lack of Adobe Camera Raw support, or the upgrade cost for CS6 is clever.

    The bridge to David Taylor-Hughes is weak though – you worked hard to link it in, but it still reads as sour grapes.

    The final ‘missed opportunities’ link is however a whole new level of sub-standard journalism. You even go out of your way to insult the buying public – classy.

    • Thanks for stopping by.

      Once again, I seem to have presented a considerable challenge to your powers of comprehension. Oh well.

  2. No, you just failed my basic taste for journalistic integrity.

    Your attempt to use the disabled parking sign to suggest that X-Pro1 users have a ‘disabled’ camera – shameful.

  3. “We’ve just been given access to a beta version of Adobe Camera Raw that supports the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and have used it to process our standard test scene. The good news is that it produces similar resolution to the camera’s JPEG output and that it appears to recognize the selected dynamic range extension setting. The X-Pro1 is not a camera with obvious peers, so we’ve presented it alongside a mixture of DSLRs and mirrorless cameras

    The Canon EOS 5D Mark III is included to see how well Fujifilm’s claims that the X-Pro1 captures resolution ‘parallel, if not superior, to a full frame sensor,’ stand up. These are just our suggested comparisons – you are able (and encouraged) to choose your own.”

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05/07/Fujifilm-X-Pro1-studio-comparison-shots-including-ACR-conversions

    Being premature just sucks doesn’t it.

    • Au contraire. Is the Fujifilm X-Pro1 supported by ACR 6.7? The answer, as you well know, is no.

      Does my piece state that the Fujifilm X-Pro1 will never be supported by ACR? The answer, as you well know, is again no.

      I am not quite sure what your problem is. Actually, I am sure but my sense of civility prevents me from spelling it out.

      May I suggest you read what is actually written rather than what you imagine I have written. Your criticisms would then carry more weight and be deserving of greater consideration.

  4. “The absence of RAW support effectively brings the curtain down on my interest.”

    “What version of ACR will eventually support the X-Pro1 is anyone’s guess”

    Don’t get all bent out of shape – You jumped the gun to try and make a point – and failed.

    X-Pro1 RAW suport in BETA at Adobe, DPR have already done a test with sample images.

    You should also note that Fuji posted their M Mount adapter on their accessories page yesterday.

    Here’s an idea for you – Try reporting something useful, instead of just trolling out the negativity.

    I’ve moved your readers on further in two posts regarding the X-Pro1, than you have in your whole article.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)