Showing the Differences of Iridient versus Lightroom

I just posted about how Lightroom doesn’t do the Fujifilm X-Trans sensors justice, and in the past I have linked to examples of this, but why not just show it to you here? I picked a very uninspiring shot with a ton of foliage in it. The shot itself was taken with the Fujifilm X-E2…

I just posted about how Lightroom doesn’t do the Fujifilm X-Trans sensors justice, and in the past I have linked to examples of this, but why not just show it to you here?

I picked a very uninspiring shot with a ton of foliage in it. The shot itself was taken with the Fujifilm X-E2 at f/1.4 with a 1/110 second shutter sped at ISO 400. I used the Fujifilm 23mm f/1.4 R lens for this shot. To my memory I think I wanted to play with the winding path, but the shallow depth of field which threw the tree out of focus messed that all up. In other words this is a throw away shot, but one that has a lot of fine detail in it.

Here’s the RAW file for the shot if you want to see the test for yourself.

Here’s the shot as I would have processed it in Lightroom to get it sharp and the color where I want it:

Here’s the same shot processed to my eye how I liked it in Iridient Developer:

Here’s the shot processed in the Camera with the Velvia film setting:

Right away the color shift is terribly obvious, but so is the detail of the Iridient shot. I like editing in Lightroom a lot better, but that detail is shitty compared to Iridient.

For better comparison, here is a crop that readily shows the difference. Again, Lightroom:

And Iridient:

And out of the camera:

There’s a huge difference and Iridient seems to do the best job by a large margin. So do keep in mind it’s not just the lens and camera, it’s also the software that makes the shot.

This website makes use of affiliate links whenever possible, these links may earn the site money by clicking them.


Discover more from The Brooks Review

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.