Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-05-2022, 05:52 AM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
Interesting. And not in a good way.
First, we're talking here about software corrections - which sometimes are forced (at least when using popular RAW development software, and of course in JPEG). Remember Pentax' accelerator? That was bad; but a heavy handed distortion and vignetting correction isn't?
So we have double standards from the beginning. Then, how are you going to compare when one brands' corrections are forced, and other's are disabled by default (or/and less aggressive)? I can easily see the lens with lower distortion and vignetting getting lower scores.

There's also the issue of how are you measuring. In a well lit studio scene, vignetting correction might not have any visible bad effect; is that true while you're pushing the sensor to its limits?
It's not like measuring with corrections disabled is always the right way to do it; there are lenses meant to only be used with these enabled. Like the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 STM IS. Yes, its huge (over 12 stops) vignetting would bet cut by the distortion correction, before vignetting correction would "fix" the rest.

Last but not least, as others pointed out - this is a slippery slope. If such default software correction works out, why not add more? CA correction for example; or sharpening, why not? How about "software corrected bokeh"? How about "virtual apertures", selling an f/2 as an f/1.4?

01-05-2022, 06:10 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cork
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
Can someone send them instructions on how to set the program line to MTF priority on Pentax cameras

Very much a slippery slope, I can see lenses becoming consumable items maybe lasting a few generations of cameras before being retired. Manufacturers easing off corrections as a lens ages pushing you to the next latest and greatest.
01-05-2022, 06:54 AM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,595
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Please provide documentation of this in Pentaxland. I have done a fair amount of forensics on the subject and own a few of the lenses with known correction profiles and have not found evidence of such.


Steve
Sorry, I should have been more specific in referencing the "some brands" you mentioned. Never Pentax afaik.
01-05-2022, 07:20 AM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Cymru
Posts: 2,356
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite;5488303 [B:
Then, how are you going to compare when one brands' corrections are forced, and other's are disabled by default (or/and less aggressive)?[/B] I can easily see the lens with lower distortion and vignetting getting lower scores.
I'd have thought the brands would correct relative to the shortcomings of their lenses.
Sony is quite a good example. The 28mm f/2 from them is practically barrel prior to distortion correct, where it then becomes a 28mm f/2, decent lens.
On the flipside, a lot of their other lenses don't exhibit this so do not need such forceful corrections, nor might other brands.

I agree, though, it's a tricky one to manage.

01-05-2022, 07:54 AM - 1 Like   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
EssJayEff's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: near Saxapahaw, NC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 956
QuoteOriginally posted by gatorguy Quote
Who turns those off?
Me.

I want to record what I see in the viewfinder. I shoot raw DNGs. If I want to apply lens corrections, I do that in the image processing software after downloading. Software generally improves over time, so corrections could be better in the future. I've never done it any other way, so I don't have a comparison to justify my decision. Call me old school.

Last edited by EssJayEff; 01-05-2022 at 07:56 AM. Reason: Added a sentence re software improvement over time.
01-09-2022, 10:02 PM - 1 Like   #21
Banned




Join Date: Nov 2021
Posts: 141
Am I the only one who realizes that the article includes the phrase

"the included software corrections to allow for a cheaper lens.." Odd, that the new mirrorless z and r mounts are being called the greatest lenses ever but are technically lower quality in design by the use of built in correction software to deal with the distortion.

for what they charge for a lens, the lens shouldnt need corrective software programming to give it the same level of optical quality found in a voightlander vitomatic II...
01-09-2022, 10:10 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Paul the Sunman's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,836
QuoteOriginally posted by filmmaster Quote
Am I the only one who realizes that the article includes the phrase

"the included software corrections to allow for a cheaper lens.." Odd, that the new mirrorless z and r mounts are being called the greatest lenses ever but are technically lower quality in design by the use of built in correction software to deal with the distortion.

for what they charge for a lens, the lens shouldnt need corrective software programming to give it the same level of optical quality found in a voightlander vitomatic II...
There is logic to it. I just don't like it.

01-09-2022, 10:39 PM   #23
Banned




Join Date: Nov 2021
Posts: 141
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
There is logic to it. I just don't like it.
there is no logic...

create a full format camera lens that essentially uses the body size and mount for a mamiya 645 medium format camera, and then profess its the greatest thing in optics for a camera.... and then use cheap enough glass that you need to use build in corrective software...

the only reason for the change in how they do review images for that website is to create a dishonest review that will make the advertiser happy, and keep spending money on them. Nothing more, nothing less.
01-10-2022, 02:43 AM - 1 Like   #24
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,976
QuoteOriginally posted by filmmaster Quote
there is no logic...

create a full format camera lens that essentially uses the body size and mount for a mamiya 645 medium format camera, and then profess its the greatest thing in optics for a camera.... and then use cheap enough glass that you need to use build in corrective software...

the only reason for the change in how they do review images for that website is to create a dishonest review that will make the advertiser happy, and keep spending money on them. Nothing more, nothing less.
The mount enables well-corrected, yet relatively lightweight high-end lenses (the f/1.2 primes).

It doesn't mean all lenses have to cost 3k+. Obviously something's gotta give in cheaper glass. And distortion is an easy one to correct without too much loss. Pentax Star glass has low distortion, but it also weighs about *an entire camera body* more than the corresponding RF lens.
01-10-2022, 03:24 AM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
QuoteOriginally posted by filmmaster Quote
Am I the only one who realizes that the article includes the phrase

"the included software corrections to allow for a cheaper lens.." Odd, that the new mirrorless z and r mounts are being called the greatest lenses ever but are technically lower quality in design by the use of built in correction software to deal with the distortion.

for what they charge for a lens, the lens shouldnt need corrective software programming to give it the same level of optical quality found in a voightlander vitomatic II...
Clearly DP Review is indicating that they would like camera brands/Amazon to be able to make more money per sale. That is the goal isn't? To cut cost on an items production, while raising the price?
01-10-2022, 06:07 AM - 1 Like   #26
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,352
QuoteOriginally posted by gatorguy Quote
That seems like a "Duh!" statement. I can think of no rational reason not to base a review of a camera manufacturer's first-party lens specifically and most 3rd-party lenses too with the lens corrections enabled before this. Who turns those off? The OOC image is what matters anyway, AFAIAC it should be raw for testing purposes but that's a different aspect of it.
As a lens reviewer and optical designer, I think that decision is absurd. Completely absurd.

They won't be reviewing lenses, they will be reviewing correction algorithms.

All lenses will not effectively be free of CA and distortion, but it will hide the modifications, and potential degradation involved in those corrections.

Let's be clear: I generally apply those corrections myself when shooting, but when reviewing I want to know what are the capabilities of the lens, not the computer.
01-10-2022, 06:08 AM   #27
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,352
QuoteOriginally posted by filmmaster Quote
the new mirrorless z and r mounts are being called the greatest lenses ever
who said that?

Fanboys?
01-10-2022, 10:44 AM   #28
mee
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,403
QuoteOriginally posted by gatorguy Quote
That seems like a "Duh!" statement. I can think of no rational reason not to base a review of a camera manufacturer's first-party lens specifically and most 3rd-party lenses too with the lens corrections enabled before this. Who turns those off?
A lot of people do this when it decreases burst rate or camera response (due to it choking on processing the images in camera). One can process them at home where time allows.
01-10-2022, 11:49 AM - 1 Like   #29
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Central Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,033
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
A lot of people do this when it decreases burst rate or camera response (due to it choking on processing the images in camera). One can process them at home where time allows.
Thanks for the courteous counter @Mee and @Bdery.

I've shot many a burst so far on the K3III and never had any complaint with the buffer clearing. I'll give you that someone else who leans heavily on it might. Anyway, while I have heavy doubt that "a lot of people do this" I can imagine there's been instances here and there where completely disabling lens corrections have been done. Personally, I've not yet discovered a downside to the slim set of lens corrections applied to a Pentax raw file.

EDIT: Does it really add processing time in camera to include them in the raw? How did you identify the proper settings to manually do so later, and how long does it take compared to allowing the camera to do so in the first place?
01-10-2022, 12:05 PM   #30
mee
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,403
Hmm I'd think the answers to your questions depend on the camera body. Some are quicker with it than others. Something high powered like a K-3 III might very well be able to chew through it with no problem. That said, there is still some form of overhead to it by nature.

In post it's the flip of a slider (at least in lightroom). Can adjust one image then bulk copy the settings to an entire series of files. How long that takes will also depend on the computer involved and the number of shots.

That said, if the image taking is very fast paced and getting the shot is critical, I'd rather err on the side of caution and disable all corrections in camera and opt to move those over to the PC.

If I was doing only 1-3 fps clicks here and there it probably wouldn't be worth it though. Unless you were already going to post process anyways.

My take at least.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
applied, files, image, images, jpegs, lens, lens profiles, photo industry, photography, process, profiles, time, times, wonder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DPR's K1ii Re-shoot is up: Score now 80% DDoram Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 197 10-17-2018 11:45 AM
Thematic Re-process your older images! sergeremy Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 3 07-07-2018 04:04 AM
Hot off the presses: DPR to re-shoot its K1mkII test. texandrews Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 107 06-02-2018 06:00 AM
“Why, you’re not a wizard at all, you’re just a man! " jeffkrol General Talk 2 11-13-2012 07:05 AM
HDR the hard way - how to process night shots Prieni Post-Processing Articles 6 10-11-2011 09:07 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:47 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top