Camera
Adobe Camera Raw vs. Capture One Express Fujifilm: A worthy free contender
Introduction
Over the past few months, I’ve been comparing the editing tools provided for free with your digital camera purchase with the 800-pound, subscription-ware gorilla in the room, Adobe Camera Raw, to see if it’s really necessary to pay for software when you’re on a tight budget. So far I’ve looked at Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Sony, and in this article it’s time to turn my attention to Fujifilm.
| Capture One 21 Express Fujifilm build 14.1’s user interface. |
Fujifilm’s customers have several different choices of software available with the purchase of their camera. There’s the in-house developed Fujifilm X Raw Studio, the Silkypix-based Raw File Converter EX 3.0 and Capture One Express Fujifilm. (Note that there’s also a similarly named and also Fuji-specific version called Capture One for Fujifilm, but since that’s payware it’s beyond the scope of this piece.)
Right now, X Raw Studio supports just 17 cameras, as compared to 42 interchangeable-lens cameras for Raw File Converter EX, and 48 ILCs for Capture One Express Fujifilm. Since Capture One supports the most ILCs, that’s the application we’ll look at in this article. So how does Capture One Express Fujifilm compare with Adobe Camera Raw? Let’s roll up our sleeves and find out.
The ground rules
This article is based upon the most recent versions of each application at the time of writing. For Adobe, that’s Camera Raw 13.2 and Bridge 11.0. For Fujifilm, it’s Capture One 21 Express Fujifilm build 14.1. My computer is a 2018 Dell XPS 15 9570 laptop running Windows 10 version 1909.
 |
| Adobe Camera Raw version 13.2’s user interface. |
I’ve chosen to use images from the Fujifilm X-T3. It’s been available long enough for processing to be optimized, and its launch price and resolution are broadly similar to those of the cameras used in my previous manufacturer software comparisons.
To ensure neither Adobe nor Fujifilm had any advantage out of the gate, I’ve aimed to reproduce, as closely as possible, the look of already-processed images from our gallery, without any prior knowledge as to the recipes behind them.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dale Baskin
Sharpness and noise reduction were left at their default settings to avoid overcomplicating things, while lens corrections were enabled for both applications. Images processed in ACR were saved at JPEG quality 11, which we use for galleries on DPReview. For Capture One, I used quality level 96 which yielded approximately the same file sizes.
The main differences
The most significant difference between Capture One and Adobe’s offerings are in their pricing and camera support.
Capture One Express Fujifilm is completely free of charge, but it only supports Fuji-branded cameras. Although it can import photos from other cameras, it won’t let you edit or export them.
While it’s offered free, you do need to supply an email address and can only get a single-install license for each email address you give. So if, say, you want to edit both on a desktop and laptop, you’ll need to supply multiple email addresses.
Capture One Express Fujifilm is a pared-down version of the full Capture One that’s only compatible with Fujifilm’s own cameras
It also has a pared-down feature set, lacking many more pro-oriented editing, capture, organization and export tools that are available in the full version of Capture One. But it still includes the basic tools most photographers are likely to need.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
With Adobe, by contrast, you have to pay an ongoing subscription fee of at least $10 per month for the Creative Cloud Photography Plan, which includes Camera Raw, Lightroom and Photoshop, and that price could increase in the future.
But Adobe’s apps will support Raw files from close to 1000 different cameras, smartphones, drones and more, and you’ll also get the combined feature-set of Lightroom, Lightroom Classic and Photoshop, which together can do far more than even the full version of Capture One.
Capture One straddles the line between first- and third-party software
Another advantage typical of manufacturer software is quicker and more in-depth support for new camera models, as well as a closer match for the look of images processed in-camera. But with Capture One actually being developed by a third party, that’s not necessarily as true as it is for most manufacturer software.
It’s worth noting, for example, that Fujifilm has a long relationship with the developer of Silkypix. And yet as of March 2021, the Silkypix-derived Raw File Converter EX has yet to add support for either the X-E4 or GFX 100S, both of which are already shipping.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
Support for those cameras in Capture One arrived on the same day both models shipped, however. So perhaps the link with Capture One is closer, or the Capture One team is just quicker (bearing in mind that neither the X-E4 nor GFX 100S uses a new sensor, which theoretically makes adding support a relatively trivial matter).
As for the look of images, Fujifilm promises it will deliver “unmatched straight-from-camera color accuracy”. Adobe, meanwhile, has color matching profiles for all of Fujifilm’s ILCs, but lacks them for many FinePix compacts. But as we’ll see in a bit, that doesn’t tell the whole story.
A clean and logical – but not very customizable – user interface
Capture One Express Fujifilm has a clean, modern-looking non-modal interface with a fixed toolbar at the top of the screen, as well as panels for both thumbnail browsing and all other tools. The tool panel can be place on the left or the right, and the thumbnail panel either at the bottom of the screen or on whichever side remains unoccupied by the tool panel.
 |
| Capture One Express Fujifilm allows only quite limited UI customization. You can only reposition the tool panel and thumbnail browser, pin individual tools, and rearrange the top toolbar. |
Atop the tool panel are buttons to access tabs grouping controls related to library control, filtering, metadata and keywording, and various groups of editing controls. There’s also a “Q” button that groups together duplicates of the controls you’re likely to need most often.
While you can’t add or remove tabs or individual controls in the Express version, you can still pin your favorites to the top of their particular tab for quicker access. You can also add more tools to the topmost toolbar, or rearrange its order.
I found the various controls on offer to be quite logically grouped and named, and easy to use. Windows UI paradigms are followed well, and you can either adjust sliders or type in values directly.
One very slight bug, though, is that the sliders seem to be stored internally with a higher level of precision than numeric entry, with the result that two images with the same numeric value can nevertheless show slightly different positions for the same slider.
Database storage and sidecars
Your editing data is stored in an overall catalog file encompassing all of your imported images, and can also be written to XMP sidecar files in the same directories as the images themselves. This lets you choose which approach you prefer, while avoiding the riskier method of writing edits into the metadata of your original Raw files.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dale Baskin
One slight oddity if you also use Photoshop in your workflow is that Capture One also embeds editing metadata into its exported JPEG files, with the result that by default Photoshop opens them in Camera Raw, not directly into the main Photoshop workspace. You can get around this by disabling Camera Raw for the JPEG file type.
Multiple monitors aren’t supported in the Express version of Capture One, but high DPI screens are supported, as are both pen and touch-screen inputs. Setups with mixed-resolution displays can cause scaling issues, however.
The best performance I’ve seen yet from a free app
Compared to most free, bundled software, Capture One Express turns in a very creditable result when it comes to performance. It still doesn’t manage to match Adobe Camera Raw in this respect – and Adobe has made another step forward in the time I’ve been writing this review – but it comes closer than has any other app I’ve yet tested.
Capture One Express Fujifilm comes closer to Adobe’s performance than any free, manufacturer-supplied app I’ve tested yet
In terms of its user interface, I found Capture One to be faster at browsing full images, while Adobe Camera Raw is a bit quicker when it came to 1:1 viewing and previewing of edits. But the advantage for Adobe was only very slight here, and Capture One’s edit previews remain very close to real-time.
Really, I only had one minor concern when it came to Capture One Express Fujifilm’s performance. The first time it’s started – and again when updated – it pops up a dialog stating that it’s “setting up hardware acceleration”. Your computer remains responsive during this process, but until completed, it more than doubles rendering times.
It takes a surprisingly long time — around 8-10 minutes — to complete this process, during which time CPU utilization never breaks around 20%, nor did my GPU pass 2-3% utilization. And even leaving the computer entirely idle doesn’t persuade Capture One to speed up.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dale Baskin
It’s a minor issue, and one you thankfully don’t see too often, but it’s nevertheless a bit annoying if you’re in a rush when you do. I suggest disallowing upgrades if you’re on a deadline, for that reason.
Adobe’s subscription-ware is still the fastest, though
When it comes to final processing, Adobe has a bit more of an edge. On my machine, Capture One Express Fujifilm requires roughly 20 seconds to process the six images used in this review, as compared to around 15 seconds to process the same images in Adobe Camera Raw.
That doesn’t quite tell the whole story, though, as Adobe’s performance improved noticeably between version 13.2 (as used throughout this review), and version 13.1 (which was current when I first started work). With the earlier ACR version, Adobe required around 17 seconds, putting Capture One just 18% behind Adobe.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
And even after Adobe’s update, Capture One trails by just 33%. By way of contrast, most manufacturer software I’ve tested takes at least twice as long as Adobe, and sometimes much longer.
Default rendering is very similar, but not auto adjustments
In terms of their color rendering, both Capture One Express Fujifilm and Adobe Camera Raw are basically indistinguishable from each other or out-of-camera JPEGs, prior to making any adjustments to your image. At least, for the Astia, Provia and Velvia film simulations.
Adobe’s skin tones made subjects look slightly sickly, whereas Capture One’s skin tones were more lifelike
With that said, results differ quite a bit if you let either application automatically adjust your images. Adobe gives you a single-button auto control, and tends to make bigger adjustments to exposure. It holds onto shadows and highlights significantly better, but also tends to oversaturate for a more consumer-friendly look.
Capture One, meanwhile, lets you choose whether or not to automatically adjust white balance, exposure, contrast/brightness, HDR, levels and rotation individually. Its auto white balance tends to do a better job, and its other auto algorithms also tended to yield more realistic colors in general than did Adobe.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Jeff Keller
I found that last point especially true for skin tones, foliage and blue skies. As you can see in my examples, Adobe’s skin tones has tended to make subjects look just slightly sickly, whereas Capture One’s skin tones are more lifelike. And there was a similar advantage in foliage and skies, which also look more natural with Capture One.
Defaults that differ: Adobe sharpens more while Capture One favors NR
Adobe’s algorithms also apply more sharpening by default, but can introduce slight but noticeable haloing. Capture One doesn’t halo by default, but its results appear less crisp.
With no fuss beyond letting the automatic algorithms do their thing, Capture One gave me significantly cleaner images
Capture One’s default noise reduction levels are also a good bit higher than those of Adobe Camera Raw. The good news, though, is that I couldn’t see any noticeable loss of detail as a result.
With absolutely no fuss beyond letting the automatic algorithms do their thing, Capture One consistently gave me significantly cleaner images. Given the smaller APS-C sensors still used by Fuji’s X-mount cameras in an increasingly full-frame world, that’s definitely great news!
Of course, both applications also allow noise reduction to be dialed back significantly from their defaults. At minimums, though, Adobe still applies a touch more chroma NR than does Capture One.
Adobe’s lens corrections are closer to the camera than Capture One
As for lens corrections, neither application’s results was quite identical to those of in-camera JPEGs, but Adobe seems significantly closer than Capture One. Results from the latter were mostly still fairly close, but occasionally differed quite noticeably. That was also true of vignetting correction, where Capture One sometimes made rather larger exposure corrections near the corners than did either Adobe or in-camera JPEGs.
Capture One also has an occasional tendency to crop images if distortion correction was enabled, even when its “hide distorted areas” setting was unchecked. The degree of cropping varied with lens and focal length, anywhere from none at all, to as much as almost 5% of the image width and height.
With all of that said, both Adobe Camera Raw and Capture One offer a lot of scope for correction, and provide a good set of controls. I’ve found Capture One to be a pretty good match for its Adobe rival, and it’s far more pleasing to use than any other free, manufacturer-provided software to date, making it quite easy to get the look I wanted with relatively little work.
Conclusion
I have to admit, the results of my testing were a bit of a surprise. Given the relationship between Capture One and Fujifilm, and the fact that the latter actually offers the software for its own users, I expected its results to more closely mirror those of in-camera processing. But in truth, it was generally Adobe that got closer to the in-camera results.
Capture One Express Fujifilm could save you hundreds over the life of your camera, yet its image quality and capabilities rival ACR well
Capture One suppresses noise much more so than Adobe does by default, but without losing any apparent detail. Colors from Adobe were generally good and matched the out-of-camera JPEGs better, but occasionally inn my testing I found that skin tones could make people look a bit ill. When it comes to the selection of controls on offer and their ease of use, both ACR and Capture One are pretty close.
Some other differences are in their distortion correction and auto adjustments. For distortion I think Adobe has a slight edge, but for auto adjustments I definitely ended up preferring Capture One over ACR’s more punchy, consumer-friendly look.
I was also impressed with Capture One’s performance. Sure, Adobe still rules the roost in this respect – and its most recent update looks to have taken another step forward – but it’s also payware software being pitted against a completely free alternative. And Capture One gets far, far closer in terms of raw speed than any other bundled software I’ve yet tried.
Download the full ACR image here; the full Capture One image here.
Photo by Dan Bracaglia
If cost is a primary concern for you and you don’t need to work with multiple camera brands, then I think it’s a no-brainer. Using Capture One Express Fujifilm could save you enough over the lifetime of your camera to buy a lens or accessory while still providing good speed, good image quality and a healthy selection of controls.
If you want the maximum possible performance, support for multiple camera brands or the extended features offered by Lightroom or Photoshop, though, then I think an Adobe Creative Cloud subscription remains your best bet.
Capture One Express Fujifilm
| Pros | Cons |
|
|
Adobe Camera Raw
| Pros | Cons |
|
|
| NASA photo / Matthew Dominick |
Hurricane Milton is barreling across the Gulf of Mexico toward the west coast of Florida, putting almost 15 million Florida residents under flood watches and prompting the evacuation of millions from the central part of the state.
Earlier today, NASA astronaut and photographer Matthew Dominick shared photos and video of Hurricane Milton through the window of the Crew Dragon Endeavour spacecraft. The spacecraft is currently waiting to undock from the International Space Station to return to Earth.
The National Hurricane Center continued to classify Milton as a Category 5 hurricane, with maximum sustained wind speeds of 265 km/h (165 mph) and warning of “life-threatening inundation from storm surge.” However, the view from space belies the terrifying wind and rain on the ground, clearly showing the pinwheel shape of the hurricane with an identifiable eye at its center.
Additionally, Dominick posted a timelapse video from Dragon Endeavour on X, giving a sense of what it’s like to pass directly over the hurricane.
Timelapse flying by Hurricane Milton about 2 hours ago.
1/6400 sec exposure, 14mm, ISO 500, 0.5 sec interval, 30fps pic.twitter.com/p5wBlC95mx
— Matthew Dominick (@dominickmatthew) October 8, 2024
In addition to Dominick’s posts on X, NASA has shared two videos of the hurricane from the International Space Station that provide different views:
Although Milton may appear serene from space, and maybe even beautiful, it poses a real risk to life and property down on Earth and will impact millions. If you’re anywhere in the path of the hurricane, you can visit the National Weather Service’s feed on X, where the agency is posting regular updates and information.
| NASA photo / Matthew Dominick |
Hurricane Milton is barreling across the Gulf of Mexico toward the west coast of Florida, putting almost 15 million Florida residents under flood watches and prompting the evacuation of millions from the central part of the state.
Earlier today, NASA astronaut and photographer Matthew Dominick shared photos and video of Hurricane Milton through the window of the Crew Dragon Endeavour spacecraft. The spacecraft is currently waiting to undock from the International Space Station to return to Earth.
The National Hurricane Center continued to classify Milton as a Category 5 hurricane, with maximum sustained wind speeds of 265 km/h (165 mph) and warning of “life-threatening inundation from storm surge.” However, the view from space belies the terrifying wind and rain on the ground, clearly showing the pinwheel shape of the hurricane with an identifiable eye at its center.
Additionally, Dominick posted a timelapse video from Dragon Endeavour on X, giving a sense of what it’s like to pass directly over the hurricane.
Timelapse flying by Hurricane Milton about 2 hours ago.
1/6400 sec exposure, 14mm, ISO 500, 0.5 sec interval, 30fps pic.twitter.com/p5wBlC95mx
— Matthew Dominick (@dominickmatthew) October 8, 2024
In addition to Dominick’s posts on X, NASA has shared two videos of the hurricane from the International Space Station that provide different views:
Although Milton may appear serene from space, and maybe even beautiful, it poses a real risk to life and property down on Earth and will impact millions. If you’re anywhere in the path of the hurricane, you can visit the National Weather Service’s feed on X, where the agency is posting regular updates and information.
Wildlife Photographer of the Year winners
The Natural History Museum has announced the winners of its prestigious Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition. This year, the museum received a record-breaking 59,228 entries from 117 countries and territories and granted awards to 100 photos. The two Grand Title winners were selected from 18 category winners.
Celebrating its 60th year, Wildlife Photographer of the Year is developed and produced by the Natural History Museum, London. You can visit the exhibition in person at the museum beginning Friday, October 11, and on tour around the UK and in Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and Switzerland, with more locations to be announced. The exhibition features all 100 winning images, videos showing the impact wildlife photography can have globally, and past Grand Title winners.
Here, we present some of our favorites, including the Grand Title and winners of many award categories.
Wildlife Photographer of the Year: Grand Title
 |
The Swarm of Life by Shane Gross, Canada
Wildlife Photographer of the Year: Grand Title
Winner, Wetlands: The Bigger Picture
Shane Gross looks under the surface layer of lily pads as a mass of western toad tadpoles swim past. Shane snorkeled in the lake for several hours through carpets of lily pads. This prevented any disturbance of the fine layers of silt and algae covering the lake bottom, which would have reduced visibility. Western toad tadpoles swim up from the safer depths of the lake, dodging predators and trying to reach the shallows, where they can feed. The tadpoles start becoming toads between four and 12 weeks after hatching. An estimated 99% will not survive to adulthood.
Location: Cedar Lake, Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
Technical details: Nikon D500 + Tokina fisheye 10–17mm F3.5–4.5 lens at 11mm; 1/200 at F13; ISO 640; 2x Sea & Sea strobes; Aquatica housing
Copyright Shane Gross / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Young Wildlife Photographer of the Year: Grand Title
 |
Life Under Dead Wood by Alexis Tinker-Tsavalas, Germany
Young Wildlife Photographer of the Year: Grand Title
Winner, 15-17 Years
Alexis Tinker-Tsavalas rolls a log over to see the fruiting bodies of slime mold and a tiny springtail. Alexis worked fast to take this photograph, as springtails can jump many times their body length in a split second. He used a technique called focus stacking, where 36 images, each with a different area in focus, are combined. Springtails are barely two millimeters long (less than a tenth of an inch). They are found alongside slime molds and leaf litter all over the world. They feed on microorganisms such as bacteria and fungi, improving soil by helping organic matter to decompose.
Location: Berlin, Germany
Technical details: Panasonic Lumix G91 + Laowa 25mm F2.8; 2.5–5x ultra macro lens; 1/200 at F4; ISO 200; Nikon SB-900 Speedlight flash; Cygnustech macro diffuser; focus stack of 36 images
Copyright Alexis Tinker-Tsavalas / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner: Urban Wildlife
 |
Tiger in Town by Robin Darius Conz, Germany
Winner, Urban Wildlife
Robin Darius Conz watches a tiger on a hillside against the backdrop of a town where forests once grew. Robin was following this tiger as part of a documentary team filming the wildlife of the Western Ghats. On this day, he used a drone to watch the tiger explore its territory before it settled in this spot. The protected areas in the Western Ghats, where tigers are carefully monitored, are some of the most biodiverse landscapes in India and have a stable population of tigers. Outside these areas, where development has created conflict between humans and wildlife, tiger occupancy has declined.
Location: Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu, India
Technical details: DJI Mavic 3 Pro Cine + 70mm F2.8 lens; 1/15 at F2.8; ISO 400
Copyright Robin Darius Conz / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Behavior: Birds
 |
Practice Makes Perfect by Jack Zhi, USA
Winner, Behavior: Birds
Jack Zhi enjoys watching a young falcon practicing its hunting skills on a butterfly above its sea-cliff nest. Jack has been visiting this area for the past eight years, observing the constant presence of one of the birds and photographing the chicks. On this day, it was a challenge to track the action because the birds were so fast. Should this young peregrine falcon make it to adulthood, tests have shown it will be capable of stooping or dropping down on its prey from above at speeds of more than 300 kilometers per hour (186 miles per hour).
Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
Technical details: Sony α9 II + 600mm F4 lens; 1/4000 at F5.6; ISO 640
Copyright Jack Zhi / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Oceans: The Bigger Picture
 |
A Diet of Deadly Plastic by Justin Gilligan, Australia
Winner, Oceans: The Bigger Picture
Justin Gilligan (Australia) creates a mosaic from the 403 pieces of plastic found inside the digestive tract of a dead flesh-footed shearwater. Justin has been documenting Adrift Lab’s work for several years, often joining them on beach walks at dawn to collect dead chicks. The team brings together biologists from around the world to study the impact of plastic pollution on marine ecosystems. Studies found that three-quarters of adult flesh-footed shearwaters breeding on Lord Howe Island – and 100% of fledglings – contained plastic. The team, including a Natural History Museum scientist, discovered it causes scarring to the lining of the digestive tract, a condition called plasticosis.
Location: Lord Howe Island, New South Wales, Australia
Technical details: Nikon D850 + 24–70mm F2.8 lens; 1/125 at F11; ISO 400; Profoto B10 + A1 flash
Copyright Justin Gilligan / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Behavior: Invertebrates
 |
The Demolition Squad by Ingo Arndt, Germany
Winner, Behavior: Invertebrates
Ingo Arndt documents the efficient dismemberment of a blue ground beetle by red wood ants. ‘Full of ant’ is how Ingo described himself after lying next to the ants’ nest for just a few minutes. Ingo watched as the red wood ants carved an already dead beetle into pieces small enough to fit through the entrance to their nest. Much of the red wood ants’ nourishment comes from honeydew secreted by aphids, but they also need protein. They are capable of killing insects and other invertebrates much larger than themselves through sheer strength in numbers.
Location: Hessen, Germany
Technical details: Canon EOS 5DS R + 100mm F2.8 lens; 1/200 at F8; ISO 400; Canon Macro Twin Lite MT-24EX flash; softboxes
Copyright Ingo Arndt / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Photojournalism
 |
Dusting for New Evidence by Britta Jaschinski, Germany/UK
Winner, Photojournalism
Britta Jaschinski looks on as a crime scene investigator from London’s Metropolitan Police dusts for prints on a confiscated tusk. Britta spent time at the CITES Border Force department, where confiscated animal products are tested. Newly developed magnetic powder allows experts to obtain fingerprints from ivory up to 28 days after it was touched, increasing the chances of identifying those involved in its illegal trade. The International Fund for Animal Welfare has distributed more than 200 specially created kits to border forces from 40 countries. They have been instrumental in four cases that resulted in 15 arrests.
Location: Heathrow Airport, London, England, UK
Technical details: Leica SL2 + 24–90mm F2.8–4 lens at 62mm; 1/80 at F3.8; ISO 200
Copyright Britta Jaschinski / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, 11-14 Years
 |
An Evening Meal by Parham Pourahmad, USA
Winner, 11-14 Years
Parham Pourahmad watches as the last rays of the setting sun illuminate a young Cooper’s hawk eating a squirrel. Over a single summer, Parham visited Ed R Levin County Park most weekends to take photographs. He wanted to showcase the variety of wildlife living within a busy metropolitan city and to illustrate that ‘nature will always be wild and unpredictable’. The Cooper’s hawk is a common species across southern Canada, the USA, and central Mexico, where it inhabits mature and open woodlands. These adaptable birds also live in urban spaces, where there are tall trees to nest in and bird feeders that attract smaller birds, which they can prey on.
Location: Ed R Levin County Park, California, USA
Technical details: Nikon D3500 + Sigma 150–600mm F5-6.3 lens at 210mm; 1/400 at F6.3; ISO 800
Copyright Parham Pourahmad / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Animals in their Environment
 |
Frontier of the Lynx by Igor Metelskiy, Russia
Winner, Animals in their Environment
Igor Metelskiy shows a lynx stretching in the early evening sunshine, its body mirroring the undulating wilderness. The remote location and changing weather conditions made access to this spot – and transporting equipment there – a challenge. Igor positioned his camera trap near the footprints of potential prey. It took more than six months of waiting to achieve this relaxed image of the elusive lynx. A survey carried out in 2013 estimated the entire Russian lynx population was around 22,500 individuals, with numbers for the Russian Far East, including those in Primorsky Krai, at 5,890.
Location: Lazovsky District, Primorsky Krai, Russia
Technical details: Sony α7 IV + 24–70mm F2.8 lens; 1/500 at F5.6; ISO 100; Scout camera controller + PIR motion sensor
Copyright Igor Metelskiy / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Impact Award
 |
Recording by Hand by Liwia Pawłowska, Poland
Winner, Impact Award
Liwia Pawłowska watches as a relaxed common whitethroat is gently held by a bird ringer. Liwia is fascinated by bird ringing and has been photographing ringing sessions since she was nine. She says that she hopes her photograph ‘helps others to get to know this topic better.’ Volunteers can assist trained staff at bird-ringing sessions, where a bird’s length, sex, condition and age are recorded. Data collected helps scientists to monitor populations and track migratory patterns, aiding conservation efforts.
Location: Rgielsko, Greater Poland Voivodeship, Poland
Technical details: Nikon Coolpix P900; 1/400 at F5; ISO 100
Copyright Liwia Pawlowska / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Impact Award
 |
Hope for the Ninu by Jannico Kelk, Australia
Winner, Impact Award
Jannico Kelk illuminates a ninu, with the wire grass and shrubs behind it providing a frame against the darkness. Jannico spent each morning walking the sand dunes of a conservation reserve, searching for footprints that this rabbit-sized marsupial may have left the night before. Finding tracks near a burrow, he set up his camera trap. The greater bilby has many Aboriginal names, including ninu. It was brought to near extinction through predation by introduced foxes and cats. Within fenced reserves where many predators have been eradicated, the bilby is thriving.
Location: Arid Recovery, Roxby Downs, South Australia, Australia
Technical details: Canon EOS 60D + 24mm F2.8 lens; 1/80 at F9; ISO 320; 3x Nikon SB-28 Speedlight flashes; Camtraptions PIR motion sensor
Copyright Jannico Kelk / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Behavior: Amphibians and Reptiles
 |
Wetland Wrestle by Karine Aigner, USA
Winner, Behavior: Amphibians and Reptiles
Karine Aigner recognizes the skin of a yellow anaconda as it coils itself around the snout of a yacaré caiman. The tour group Karine was leading had stopped to photograph some marsh deer when she noticed an odd shape floating in the water. Through binoculars, Karine quickly recognized the reptiles and watched as they struggled with each other. Caimans are generalist feeders and will eat snakes. As anacondas get larger, they will include reptiles in their diet. It’s hard to determine who is the aggressor here. On the snake’s back are two tabanids, blood-sucking horseflies that are known to target reptiles.
Location: Transpantaneira Highway, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Technical details: Sony α1 + 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 lens; 1/400 at F16; ISO 800
Copyright Karine Aigner / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Animal Portraits
 |
On Watch by John E Marriott, Canada
Winner, Animal Portraits
John E Marriott frames a lynx resting, with its fully grown young sheltering from the cold wind behind it. John had been tracking this family group for almost a week, wearing snowshoes and carrying light camera gear to make his way through snowy forests. When fresh tracks led him to the group, he kept his distance to make sure he didn’t disturb them. Lynx numbers usually reflect the natural population fluctuations of their main prey species, the snowshoe hare. With climate change reducing snow coverage, giving other predators more opportunities to hunt the hares, hare populations may decline, in turn affecting the lynx population.
Location: Yukon, Canada
Technical details: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV + 100–400mm fF.5–5.6 lens at 400mm; 1/800 at F9; ISO 1250
Copyright John E Marriott / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Photojournalist Story Award
 |
Dolphins of the Forest by Thomas Peschak, Germany/South Africa
Winner, Photojournalist Story Award
‘Among the Trees’: The Amazon river dolphin is one of two freshwater dolphin species living in the Amazon and Orinoco basins. Only this species has evolved to explore the seasonally flooded forest habitat.
Portfolio Story: Thomas Peschak documents the relationship between endangered Amazon river dolphins, also known as botos or pink river dolphins, and the people with whom they share their watery home. The Amazon river dolphin’s relationship with humans is complex. Traditional Amazonian beliefs hold that the dolphins can take on human form, and they are both revered and feared. Others see them as thieves who steal fish from nets and should be killed. Thomas took these images in areas where local communities are creating opportunities for tourists to encounter the dolphins. This brings another set of problems: when they’re fed by humans, the dolphins become unhealthy, and younger individuals don’t learn to hunt for themselves.
Technical details: Nikon Z9 + 14–30mm F4 lens at 16mm; 1/320 at F6.3; ISO 1250
Location: Brazil and Colombia
Copyright Thomas Peschak/ Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Winner, Rising Star Portfolio Award
 |
The Serengeti of the Sea by Sage Ono, USA
Winner, Rising Star Portfolio Award
‘Rubies and Gold’: These tube-snout fish eggs will fade in color as the embryos develop. But for now, they sparkle like gems next to the kelp’s gold, glowing, gas-filled buoyancy aids. The green serrated edges of the kelp fronds complete the simple composition.
Portfolio Story: Sage Ono explores the abundant life around the giant kelp forests in Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Inspired by the stories told by his grandfather, a retired marine biologist, and by a photograph of a larval cusk eel, Sage acquired a compact underwater camera and decided to take up underwater photography. After university, he moved to the coast near the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary to pursue his interest. Here, it’s the submerged world of the bay’s forests of giant kelp – the biggest of all seaweeds – and the diversity of life they contain that have captured his imagination.
Technical details: Nikon D850 + 60mm F2.8 lens; 1/160 at F14; ISO 250; Nauticam NA-D850 housing; 2x Sea & Sea YS-D2J strobes
Location: California, USA
Copyright Sage Ono / Wildlife Photographer of the Year
-
Solar Energy3 years agoDLR testing the use of molten salt in a solar power plant in Portugal
-
world news11 months ago
Gulf, France aid Gaza, Russia evacuates citizens
-
Camera11 months agoDJI Air 3 vs. Mini 4 Pro: which compact drone is best?
-
Solar Energy11 months agoGlencore eyes options on battery recycling project
-
Camera3 years agoCharles ‘Chuck’ Geschke, co-founder of Adobe and inventor of the PDF, dies at 81
-
world news11 months ago
Strong majority of Americans support Israel-Hamas hostage deal
-
Camera11 months agoSony a9 III: what you need to know
-
TOP SCEINCE6 months agoCan animals count?
