RAW Converter Comparison

(A word of warning. Nikon has announced a new version of Capture to accompany the D2h; Adobe is likely to iterate AdobeRAW when Photoshop 8.0 appears; every other product has had fairly rapid and regular updates. These opinions are for released products as of 9/1/03. I'll come back and retouch this page from time to time [so check that date I just gave], but don't expect it to update as rapidly as these products are; I can't rerun a full set of tests every time one iterates.)

I've written extensively about the various RAW image converters for Nikon-based DSLRs in my newsletter, but it was pointed out to me recently that I didn't have anything on the Web site about them. What follows is a very concise summary of my current opinions. If you want more, you'll have to read the newsletter, as the converters iterate so fast that I don't have time to do an in depth article for the Web site; moreover, many of the differences can be subtle, and I can only show that in the high resolution format the newsletter uses.

For Nikon NEF files from the D1 series and D100:

Nikon users have a wealth of competent choices. Nikon Capture still is my favorite amongst the bunch, though for large batches of images I've moved to PhaseOne's CaptureOne DSLR. While I'm pretty tough on Bibble here, if you use Fred Miranda's linearity Action, Bibble is probably the first choice of converters. Still, it's hard to beat what comes out of Capture or CaptureOne, though Adobe RAW comes close. All three of these converters have no problematic weakness, though image quality produced by each is a bit different.

Nikon NEF order of preference (Windows): Nikon Capture, CaptureOne DSLR, AdobeRAW, QImage, Bibble.
Nikon NEF order of preference (Mac): Nikon Capture, AdobeRAW, CaptureOne DSLR, Bibble.

For RAF files from S2 Pro:

(Note: CaptureOne DSLR will support S2 Pro files in the next iteration.) Okay, this table needs some explaining, doesn't it? Adobe RAW is inviting, but it doesn't have a good handle on white balance with RAF images and it sometimes, but not predictably, produces very annoying artifacts. Bibble handles RAF files about as well as it does NEF, which is to say decent but not exceptional. QImage manages to do almost as good as job as Fujifilm on RAF files (perhaps because Michael Chaney had an S2 Pro as his personal camera), but will still baffle most with its non-intuitive interface. The latest iteration of the Fujifilm EX converter is better than the previous one, but still isn't the most convenient thing to fit into your workflow. Still, it arguably produces the best results time after time from S2 Pro RAF files, so is the clear choice. Fortunately for those of us in the US, it comes bundled with the camera. Unlike the NEF converters, note that every RAF converter does have a weakness of some sort. For Fujifilm to be competitive moving forward, they need to make sure that gets fixed, either by themselves or by being more forthcoming to other developers.

Fujifilm RAF order of preference (Windows): Fujifilm EX, Qimage
Fujifilm RAF order of preference (Mac): Fujifilm EX

For DCR files from Pro 14n:

This comparison probably isn't fair, as Adobe RAW's Pro 14n support is partly derived from previous Kodak DCS cameras. The good news is that while Kodak Photo Desk has a few warts on the Windows platform still, it does an excellent job of converting Pro 14n images and comes free with the camera--you really don't need anything else, at least not until someone proves they can decipher the DCR format better than Kodak can.

Kodak DCR order of preference (Windows and Mac): Photo Desk

Yes, there are many more converters I haven't mentioned, including the bare bones DCRAW code that appears to have been adopted as an engine by a number of more obscure converters. Then there's the just released Silverfast DCPro. But none of them I've looked at have the history, following, or ability of the major converters listed here. DCPro, for example, seems promising on the surface, but so far in my testing produces results less compelling than the best converters and has far too many scanner-legacy bits left in the product.

Also, note that the converters have a wide variety of resource requirements and fit into workflows differently. That can make a difference to you, especially if you're using a laptop to convert. CaptureOne DSLR chews up disk space, memory, and CPU cycles, but provides a relatively complete workflow, for example; AdobeRAW is positively svelte in comparison, but requires other products, including, of course Photoshop, to make a compete workflow. Nikon Capture and Fujifilm EX really require that you use Nikon View and Finepix Viewer, respectively, if you want to maximize your workflow clarity. Bibble and QImage have modest footprints, but Bibble mates well with only Extensis Portfolio, while QImage is the workflow hermit of the bunch.

I don't think it's any surprise that I'd pick the converter supplied by the camera manufacturer in every case as my favorite at the moment. Nikon Capture and Kodak Photo Desk have long, rich update histories and are relatively mature products created by the organization that knows the file format best. Fujifilm EX is still an immature (and poorly designed) product, but it really does appear that only Fujifilm currently understands the odd honeycomb matrix used by their cameras. Still, the differences from other converters are becoming smaller in output quality and unless Nikon, Kodak, and Fujifilm truly get their workflow acts together, I suspect that I won't be saying the same thing a six months from now.