メインコンテンツへスキップ

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Support for Canon S100

Casey6
Any word on when the update of CO will be out to allow RAW processing for new Canon S100?
0

コメント

25件のコメント

日付 投票
  • Ulf Liljegren
    I can almost certain tell you that it will be in the next release which is due soon.
    0
  • Dave241
    Ulf, Is there any chance that the distortion on the S95 files will be fixed on the next update as well?

    Dave...
    0
  • Ulf Liljegren
    Distortion can be fixed in lens tool
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    ... it will be in the next release which is due soon.

    This is good news, as long as "soon" is measured in days and not in months.
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    [quote="Jim MSP" wrote:
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    ... it will be in the next release which is due soon.

    This is good news, as long as "soon" is measured in days and not in months.

    ... or weeks ...? 😉
    0
  • Ulf Liljegren
    Should we keep the holiday spirit high and hope for gifts before christmas? 😄
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    Should we keep the holiday spirit high and hope for gifts before christmas? 😄


    We can always hope. All gifts received will be worth a thank you.
    0
  • Dave241
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    Distortion can be fixed in lens tool


    Ulf, I am aware that I can correct it with the lens tool.
    But the problem is caused by C1 in the first place! and Phase one is aware of the problem.

    I quote Drew here:

    "Yes, this is a known issue.
    Currently correcting for distortion manually and applying to all of your images (as the distortion remains the same throughout) is the correct workaround. We hope to address this in the future."

    So I ask again is this ever going to be addressed?

    Dave...
    0
  • Drew Altdo
    Dave,
    The issue has been reported and is being reviewed accordingly. I don't know that it will be addressed in the next update but i'll look into it. Since there is a workaround with the Lens Correction tool I don't know that it is a bug of the highest priority.

    UPDATE:
    It does not seem that default distortion correction for the S95 will be in the next release. It seems we don't have the particulars from Canon in regard to the distortion and in testing it can change with the zoom level, so defaulting the images from this camera would not be a fix for all images.
    The defaults are still being worked on to define the distortion encoding but will not be available in the next update. Sorry ☹️
    0
  • Dave241
    [quote="Drew" wrote:
    Dave,
    The issue has been reported and is being reviewed accordingly. I don't know that it will be addressed in the next update but i'll look into it. Since there is a workaround with the Lens Correction tool I don't know that it is a bug of the highest priority.

    UPDATE:
    It does not seem that default distortion correction for the S95 will be in the next release. It seems we don't have the particulars from Canon in regard to the distortion and in testing it can change with the zoom level, so defaulting the images from this camera would not be a fix for all images.
    The defaults are still being worked on to define the distortion encoding but will not be available in the next update. Sorry ☹️


    Hi Drew,
    Thanks for your reply, I do hope something can be done in the near future as it is a lot of extra work correcting the distortion on each file individually.

    Dave...
    0
  • Drew Altdo
    [quote="Dave241" wrote:
    I do hope something can be done in the near future as it is a lot of extra work correcting the distortion on each file individually.
    Dave...


    I own the camera so I feel your pain. I've created some Styles to adjust distortion and purple fringing among a few other things that I find a necessity with the camera. It's quite easy to apply the style and I do it on Import so it's just one extra simple click and then it's all taken care of. Granted, there is some fine tuning that needs to be done on critical images but for the most part the distortion is very similar.
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    For S90, S95 try PTLens for distortion correction. It can correct both jpeg (which have some in camera distortion correction, but not perfect) and RAW.

    edit: PTLens also can correct S100 RAW and jpeg lens distortion. It automatically detects camera and focal length. Also it can do CA corrections as well.
    0
  • SFA
    I recently obtained an S90 and find that comparison of RAW to the camera's jpg suggest that distortion correction of about 100% at the wide (6mm) end seems about right. At around 10mm something like 80% is close enough and at longer lengths there seems to be little problem.

    FWIW my particular body seems not to exhibit any noticable purple fringing most of the time. One or twice when pixel peeping at 100% I have seen the slightest hint of something in very narrow overexposed highlights but CO seems to deal with that with no problem.

    Of course is it unlikely that all individual examples of the camera are consistent at that level.
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    Should we keep the holiday spirit high and hope for gifts before christmas? 😄


    It is almost Christmas, and I am still hoping.
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Jim MSP" wrote:
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    Should we keep the holiday spirit high and hope for gifts before christmas? 😄


    It is almost Christmas, and I am still hoping.


    ☹️
    0
  • Ulf Liljegren
    ....you have to wait a little bit more.... but I assure you it is not that long, only until next year 😂
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    ....you have to wait a little bit more.... but I assure you it is not that long, only until next year 😂


    So, we missed another targeted release date. It's ok to do this once or twice, but not more. Otherwise the planning needs help. 😕

    Next year, 2012, has 12 months, 52 weeks, and 366 days.
    ☹️
    0
  • Ulf Liljegren
    So, we missed another targeted release date.


    No release date was ever communicated, just a gentle hint toward when it approx could be expected...

    I guess it does not matter: 6.3.3 is now released http://www.phaseone.com/en/Downloads/CaptureOne.aspx 😄
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    ....
    : 6.3.3 is now released http://www.phaseone.com/en/Downloads/CaptureOne.aspx 😄


    Thanks. I'll take it for a test drive tonight.
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Jim MSP" wrote:
    [quote="Ulf" wrote:
    ....
    : 6.3.3 is now released http://www.phaseone.com/en/Downloads/CaptureOne.aspx 😄


    Thanks. I'll take it for a test drive tonight.


    So far, so good. For me, I don't see any major performance improvement. Perhaps more stable though. I am using 2.5 G memory and all remains good.
    0
  • sankos
    I would like to ask S100 users to comment on the comparison of colour rendition by C1 (v. 6.3.3) to the in-camera jpeg and other raw converters. I took sample raws from DPReview and Imaging Resource and much to my surprise C1 gave me the poorest rendition of colours (except for skin tones!), especially the reds, which are mottled and desaturated. The in-camera jpegs oversaturate reds a bit, ACR 6.2 (via the DNG Converter 6.6) was the best with colours (Adobe are said to have improved their colour profiles), RawTherapee 4.0.7 was very close to it with colours and even better with detail extraction.

    I suspect that something similar to Pentax K-5 colour profiles might have happened to the S100, namely re-using the profiles from the previous cameras in the series -- S95 is said to oversaturate the reds and Canon seem to have changed that, that's why the poor reds with C1-converted files from the S100; at least that's my theory.

    So, what's your take on this?
    0
  • sankos
    So, v. 6.3.4 hasn't changed anything concerning this issue, AFAICT. The S100 profile looks exactly the same as the S95, so it looks like P1 is cutting corners here -- and they shouldn't because while the older camera is based on a CCD sensor, the latter uses CMOS technology. And the competition gets it right -- LR4 and ACR 6.6 have very good profiles for the S100.
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    The Canon S100 support in CO 6.3.4 is still preliminary, according to release notes.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="sankos" wrote:
    So, v. 6.3.4 hasn't changed anything concerning this issue, AFAICT. The S100 profile looks exactly the same as the S95, so it looks like P1 is cutting corners here -- and they shouldn't because while the older camera is based on a CCD sensor, the latter uses CMOS technology. And the competition gets it right -- LR4 and ACR 6.6 have very good profiles for the S100.



    Can you imagine how busy various web site forums would be is a company like Adobe, claiming a huge and overbearing number of users around the world compared to their nearest competitors, had got it wrong?

    Can you imagine Canon and others not bothering to ensure that Adobe products (with no hardware conflict potential to worry about) received maximum support at the earliest opportunity to ensure that their output was OK?

    I really don't see what the issue is here. Things take time, as we know. They take a little longer without the sort of 'access' to information and/or resources that I would imagine Adobe has ensured over some years of development.

    Consider also that we are discussing a pocket camera here. I don't mean to take anything away from the potential of Canon's pocketable S series - I have an S90 myself and I think it is very good for what it is - but really is it SO important in the general scheme of digital file processing that P1 has to be judged on its ability to support the device within weeks of launch? It's not as if the camera has no support from anyone. Heck, it comes with support from Canon. Is that so bad as to be unusable? If so, is everyone shouting at Canon and telling them to up their game?


    Grant Perkins
    0
  • sankos
    Paul, Grant -- sorry if I came across a bit harsh on P1. My intention was to voice my findings and provide feedback for other users of the camera and the developers to notice that there are people who expect nothing but the best of the company that has earned its reputation in the imaging field. I understand that the major / professional kinds of equipment have the priority, but does that mean that compact users can't expect proper support for their cameras? I realise it takes time but I want to make sure that things won't be left at the current state of affairs.

    And Adobe can get it wrong and move on, especially if you're in the minority -- my K10D is better served by CO than by LR, for instance, and I'm sure there are numerous examples like that.
    0

投稿コメントは受け付けていません。