Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Super and Ultra Wide [was New bags]

Subject: Re: [OM] Super and Ultra Wide [was New bags]
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 20:40:19 -0800
On 12/26/2017 5:23 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
Wide-Angle Moose wrote:
The 9-18 just isn't wide enough in tight spots.
Exactly. Yes, it's really wide, esp. by film days standards. And yet, in
close quarters, it not as wide as I would like. The Laowa and the 7-14 zoom
seem to break through a barrier. Perhaps it's just getting beyond 90º
horizontal?
I'm reminded of the difference between the E-system lenses. The 7-14
had a ton of optical correction and gave pretty much true coverage of
the 7mm focal length. The 9-18 needed a lot of correction on the wide
end and while 9mm was "true", it didn't give you that much coverage
after correction. The 11-22 almost had as much usable coverage at 11mm
as the 9-18 did at 9mm.

That's what I've been blathering about, off and on. M.Zuiko 7-14, 9-18 and 12-100 all rely quite a bit on firm/software correction (Panny 7-14 and 12-60, about as much.) That's OK - except - correction makes the image bigger, especially wider, and Viewer 3, Adobe and SilkPix all lop off the edges to maintain the same size.

The only good solutions are DxO or a Raw converter that doesn't use the in 
image file corrections and PTLens.

Capture One is even worse. If they have a profile for your lens, it crops even more than the others, without quite getting lines straight. Add some more correction, lose more edges and still miss getting the center unbowed. Go further, get the center straight, and the outer areas have gone pincushion. CRAP for serious WA.

Topaz Studio is even more fun. If it doesn't find a profile (from LensFun), it just defaults to some other lens and states authoritatively:

"*Camera and Lens Detected*:
Olympus / E-M5MarkII
Olympus / Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2.0"

giving me a lovely dish shaped horizon on an image from the 12-100.

I told them:

"Image shot with Oly 12-100 zoom shows in Lens Correction as Oly 12/2.0 prime. Correction obviously wrong, too, with dished skyline. I didn't own the 12/2 at that time

Also image shot with LEICA DG 100-400/F4.0-6.3 @ 364 mm shows up as LEICA DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm f2.8. I've never had that lens."

They say:
"The list of currently supported lenses is determined by a resource known as the LensFun library.  (please refer to this original 3rd party library website link http://lensfun.sourceforge.net/lenslist/) The LensFun library provides us with the profiles that we use to autocorrect lens distortion, and is updated quite frequently.

When I take a look, unfortunately it seems that Oly 12/2.0 and LEICA DG 
100-400/F4.0-6.3 are not in the list. "

I suggested to them
'How much better if it said "We're sorry, your lens is not in our database.", 
or something like that.'

There's a lot of sloppy stuff out there. I would never use Topaz for Raw conversion anyway, but they do have some other useful stuff.

Sloppy C. Moose

--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz