First full size Fuji X PRO 1 RAW(!) files available for you.

Some interesting news are coming from the cold Russia! Prophotos (Click here / via Fujirumors) posted a dozen of RAW files you can download right now! For the first time you can check what’s the maximum image quality possible with the Fuji X PRO 1. As the JPEG engine from Fuji is already very good I don’t expect any huge improvement. I guess you will have more visible moire effects. You can use Raw Therapee (free download) or Silkypix (free trial version) to open those files.

Direct links:
X-Pro1, ISO 200, F3.6, 1/18 s, Download RAW
X-Pro1, ISO 400, F3.6, 1/38 s, Download RAW
X-Pro1, ISO 800, F3.6, 1/75 s, Download RAW
X-Pro1, ISO 1600, F3.6, 1/160 s, Download RAW
X-Pro1, ISO 3200, F3.6, 1/320 s, Download RAW
X-Pro1, ISO 6400, F3.6, 1/640 s, Download RAW


UPDATE: Plenty of JPEG images are also available at Lenstip (Click here).

  • Bobby

    Barely not a single bit of noise at 6400. I’m blown away.

  • soldar

    Raw Therapee Like we opened the olympus EM-5 raws.
    the noise at 6400 truly is amazing even at raw.

  • Vivek

    Looks nice. :)

    The price of the camera is good as well, especially after Olympus announced their prices for their EM-5.

    • d3xmeister

      Yes. The E-M5 is MUCH cheaper, MUCH smaller and lighter by a big amount when you also consider lenses, and Much faster in use thanks to super fast and precise AF, also tracking, and touch shutter. IQ seems one stop better with the X Pro 1

      • greg

        The Olympus E-M5 and Fuji X Pro 1 are almost the identical size and weight.

    • d3xmeister

      Also the X Pro 1 does not have any image stabilization, when the E-M5 have it with all lenses.
      These cameras really does not have anything in common, and they appeal to totally different photographers.

      • IHUR

        That micro sensor in EM5 kills all the features in that camera for me. All I care is IQ, cause that what I expect people to see and appreciate from my work. They will prolly never see my camera, but they will surely see my photographs.

        If you just want to take your kids pictures at home, or your friend on the streets, then all you need is that micro-sensor EM5 for its fast AF and ‘weathershield’ body and touch shutter. But if you do take some effort to go to some places to shoot some wonderful scenery, or do some serious photography activity make sure you bring a camera that can capture the fullest of its IQ and DR and it will never be done with that micro-sensor camera you’ve preordered and it will never touch the IQ of this Fuji or the other latest APS-C cameras today.

        Now go back to your micro-sensor forum and try to justify your preorder again by reading the other fanboys comments about that micro EM5

        • Mat

          There are many considerations to make when buying a camera. Your argument applies equally to APS-C vs. FF or FF vs medium, etc. Cost comes into play, as does size/weight, lens selection, etc.

          Dynamic range, resolution and noise differences between cameras are important but not the whole story. They’re not even fixed quantities as something as simple as temperature can have a huge effect.

          Different people will choose different cameras based on different priorities. Yea, the APS-C cameras have better sensor performance limits but to imply that someone’s dumb to choose something else is, itself, dumb.

        • davey

          While I would hope the Fuji will be better, they both seem to be 12-bit RAW, and a preliminary look at the Olympus read noise performance suggests it may do better than you’d expect given Olympus’s history. Anyway, DxO will tell the tale in the end.

        • keoj

          I’m sorry but this comment makes no sense to me at all. If you are really worried about IQ and DR than use film or get a large format sensor based camera. Both will blow either an APS-C or a MFT sensor away. Calling out MFT users as “fanboys” is quite rude. You correctly state that people look at the end work and not the tools the work was contructed with. The Fuji sensor looks good…..but I doubt in most cases folks would easily tell what sensor was used. I see optics as having as big a role as sensors. Just saying……

        • patrick

          I understand what he is trying to say, I just don’t agree with how he is saying it.

          The OMD looks great, great specs, but seriously APS-c sensor in the long run will always be better and the price difference is negligible (read OMD and Nex-7) I am one of those who is looking at these cameras with the intention to mount manual focus lenses. I got my wife an ep-2 a while ago and yes it was cool and novel to mount some of my M lenses to play around with. However, you quickly realize that if you have lenses based around 35mm FF then the crop factor on the micro 4/3 is just not realistically usable. A 35mm is a 75mm. So I am really looking and waiting at how this camera handles manual focus. To go off on m 4/3 again. If the camera size of APS-C and m4/3 bodies are relatively the same size and in many cases similar in price I don’t see how m 4/3 can compete in the long run. There is a lens difference no doubt, but that gap can quickly close. Just my opinion…

        • Gabriel

          For your kids and friend, no need of either the oly or fuji, just buy the cheaper canon/nikon, around 500euro with kit lens, or buy it naked and add a good bright zoom (18-50 f2.8 tamron/sigma) This gives you enough IQ for everyday use, for less money,but of course a bigger package and not so sexy camera.

  • qu tu

    which software to open raw files?

  • N.R.

    This Rawtherapee software is just so annoying! It opened the image with incorrect WP, all purple, and the noise is terrible. What am I doing wrong?

    • d3xmeister

      That is the true RAW file. I had to bump the ISO 6400 file over 3 stops to get the correct exposure, which means the XPro 1 sensor does not have analog ISO over ISO 1000. It only applies digital EV. And it’s not only the Fuji, all sensors seem to work like this these days.

    • blueget

      Before blaming free Software whose last version has been out long before the X-PRO 1 even was announced, you should calm down and take a look at what you can do… for example adjusting the “tint” slider.

      Oh, and the artifacts are because the demosaicing algorithms suit regular Bayer pattern cameras and the X-PRO 1 has a different CFA pattern.

      • N.R.

        before anyone starts “blaming the free software” nobody should have suggested that it natively opens these files in the first place!

        I see that I can do all the adjustments by hand, and it brings quite poor results for a ISO6400 image, but as everyone above is in awe, I was wondering if I was seeing something else.

        By the way, this “free software” brings terrible results even with my Nikon NEF files, so “before camera is available” is not the problem, it’s RAW engine is.

        • hexx

          Hi, if it helps, you can download 30 day free trial of Silkypix which is bundled with Fuji cameras. Recent update supports X-Pro1:

          here is the link where you can download win and mac versions:

          But, Mac version is horrid, painfully slow. Does the job for this situation though, I’ve just imported RAF to it and exported it without any changes as 16-bit TIFF and then imported that one to LR4 Beta.

  • Jean-Michel

    It’s a really attracting camera. I’m impatient to see lenses lab review, and test with legacy lenses….

  • Kylberg

    Very strange subjects for test photos I must say :-)
    But promising quality-wise.

  • brudy

    I’ve got my finger on the pre-order button, I just want to hear how it works with m-mount lenses.

  • IHUR

    Great samples. Take a look at that closedup face pic of that guy with the hat, fine details and DR, but from these samples I notice that the 18mm is perhaps the weakest lens of all 3.

    • Gabriel

      Yes, 18mm are strange, not details on the black or brown tuxedo . Blue train looks also plain blue, and out of focus too :(

  • Kylberg has several, more relevant examples, jpg with minimum sharpness and NR off. They look great!
    m43 16 mpix = 7100pix/mm2
    APS-C 24 mpix = 6500pix/mm2
    FF 36 mpix = 4200pix/mm2
    APS-C 16 mpix = 4300pix/mm2

  • alex

    Thanks for link, what a great camera…. but man digital technology have big mountain to climb ..mamiya samples (DR, 3D look) just blows away the fuji and the whole digital cam pack

  • Camaman

    Great pics on lenstip… But first few samples are OOF and shutter speed was VERY high in those. Don’t know why they even posted them.

    This will be a wonderful camera, but I do feel its AF will be the its biggest complaint.

    For so much money at least AF should be on par with m43 cameras.
    I still have a feeling Fuji’s computer in the camera is to slow do do all we expect it to do.

  • Jordan Drake

    I just finished editing this hands-on field test video with the X-Pro1. I thought a few people on here would be interested.

  • Michael

    Ok, the lenstip guys did a fine test, I think the first 6 shots are out of focus. The portrait shot at 800 ISO of a girl is great, nice detail, skin tone, etc. My only problem is with the whole photoshoot… you got 30’s car you got’s 30’s styled girl and then you get a guy wearing some stupid hat from the shopping mall next door… geeze, they put all this work and they couldn’t get this detail right… Did I say that the girl shot look great?

  • compositor20

    Its funny that you are saying OM-D is very good has it all except IQ compared with x-pro-1… but I bet with you they will be using both the same sensor! so there will be 0.64 stops difference in high ISO and since they are 12 bits they will have the same DR… go to 43rumors and check those high iso samples from OM-D they are amazing and since Panasonic doesnt have anything like that it must be the Toshiba/Fuji sensor in there since Fuji viewfinder was made with help from Olympus.

    The medium format is really good in the reds and browns and in highlights and midtones.. but lacks fine detail… and the shadows are simple: black… fuji has much better shadows… skintones are better in MF

  • robertom

    wonder how the voightlander heliar 15mm will perform with the fuji xpro, i does very well on terms of sharpness on the 5n (if fuji’s own wide is not as good as it is showing in samples around, the cosina could become an interesting player.

  • Kenneth

    IQ is impressive. However, with its price tag, I will consider overall performance, not only IQ.

    I will hold my decision until the improvement on both AF and MF.


    Great images on LensTip!

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The Mirrorlessrumors website,, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.