[Guest]

Jens, I don't have direct experience with the Fuji stuff. Still, reading here and there, I've got the suspicion that the treatment of Fuji RAW by ACR could be not optimal - the problem being in the peculiar characteristics of the array of the Fuji sensor, which is very different from others.

 

When you say that a ACR-processed raw is not different than the corresponding JPEG I'm very puzzled (I mean: it could also be that Fuji JPEG are outstanding, maybe the sample file doesn't represent a critical scenario in function of sharpness or dynamic, but in the end the first conclusion I think of is that the RAW processing hasn't been optimal.

 

I suppose Fuji has its own specific software to process its RAW, right? If so, you should try to have a run with it and see whether it produces better results.

 

 

PS If things are like that, it's a bit of a problem. I've recently evaluated Fuji, and among other criteria, I had this suspicion about raw processing (which for me is important, since I only use Adobe). I'd be very curious to see whether it was just a suspicion or if there is some fact.

 

 To clarify: I find the Fuji jpgs to be alot  better then the jpgs from any other manufacturer (sharpness, resolution, colour). However Fuji's jpgs (and raws) they are certinly worse than the results i can obtain from other cameras' raw files. Thus, I find not much use in the fact that fuji jpgs are as good as the fuji raws.