A heads up on Canon in-camera lens correction.
It looks like questions about automated lens corrections may be about to attain a new level of potential complexity and confusion so I thought it might be worth opening a thread about it as a focal point for discussions.
As far as I know the matters raised only apply to Canon at the moment - but who knows when may turn up?
FIrstly Canon have advised that some of the in camera correction features for two of their lenses and have (or will be ) releasing a Firmware update for camera bodies:
"Corrects a phenomenon in which when using the camera with the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM or EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM lens, even if lens aberration correction is set to “Enableâ€, correction will not be applied."
Currently the most recent body releases have firmware releases but older bodies (although not ALL older bodies, presumably because the bodies don't support the features anyway) are, reportedly, also expected to get an update.
Secondly Sigma have reported that there are some limitations of functionality when using their lenses with the new Canon 5D4 (for example).
"• When using a SIGMA interchangeable lens for EOS, setting the corrections to [Disable] is recommended, as “Lens Correction†functions of the camera, such as Peripheral illumination correction, Chromatic aberration correction, Diffraction correction and Distortion correction are not supported.*
* If those functions are activated, the performance of lenses may not be accurate.
* This is not only for EOS 5D Mark IV, but also for other camera bodies with the same function."
How this might affect software developers attempting to work with camera and lens provided data to auto correct images could be interesting. Not only knowing things don't work but also the timing for changing things when they do eventually work and knowing whether that change then needs to be managed retroactively ...
It is possible, I suppose, the the in-camera corrections onliy apply to the in-camera generated jpgs or use by Canon's own development software. However if the information is available one might imagine others would like to make use use of it in some way.
And then of course there is a timing issue since lens/body/firmware/etc. change points will rarely be co-ordinated.
So much extra work for everyone affected for no real benefit. If only things had been better coordinated in the first place ...
Does anyone know of other similar examples? It might be useful to have a managed list of anomalies with dates and "How fixed" information readily available for when the enquiries start to flood in!
(Hat tip to Keith Cooper at Northlight Images (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/Cano ... enses.html) for the original heads up about the Sigma press release on 24th Sept 2016. Other sources have posted it as well.)
Grant
As far as I know the matters raised only apply to Canon at the moment - but who knows when may turn up?
FIrstly Canon have advised that some of the in camera correction features for two of their lenses and have (or will be ) releasing a Firmware update for camera bodies:
"Corrects a phenomenon in which when using the camera with the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM or EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM lens, even if lens aberration correction is set to “Enableâ€, correction will not be applied."
Currently the most recent body releases have firmware releases but older bodies (although not ALL older bodies, presumably because the bodies don't support the features anyway) are, reportedly, also expected to get an update.
Secondly Sigma have reported that there are some limitations of functionality when using their lenses with the new Canon 5D4 (for example).
"• When using a SIGMA interchangeable lens for EOS, setting the corrections to [Disable] is recommended, as “Lens Correction†functions of the camera, such as Peripheral illumination correction, Chromatic aberration correction, Diffraction correction and Distortion correction are not supported.*
* If those functions are activated, the performance of lenses may not be accurate.
* This is not only for EOS 5D Mark IV, but also for other camera bodies with the same function."
How this might affect software developers attempting to work with camera and lens provided data to auto correct images could be interesting. Not only knowing things don't work but also the timing for changing things when they do eventually work and knowing whether that change then needs to be managed retroactively ...
It is possible, I suppose, the the in-camera corrections onliy apply to the in-camera generated jpgs or use by Canon's own development software. However if the information is available one might imagine others would like to make use use of it in some way.
And then of course there is a timing issue since lens/body/firmware/etc. change points will rarely be co-ordinated.
So much extra work for everyone affected for no real benefit. If only things had been better coordinated in the first place ...
Does anyone know of other similar examples? It might be useful to have a managed list of anomalies with dates and "How fixed" information readily available for when the enquiries start to flood in!
(Hat tip to Keith Cooper at Northlight Images (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/Cano ... enses.html) for the original heads up about the Sigma press release on 24th Sept 2016. Other sources have posted it as well.)
Grant
0
La publicación no admite más comentarios.
Comentarios
0 comentarios