Sony FE lens support - another typical let down
sony is bundling and featuring c1 for a while now. it also seems the a7 cameras in general are a gerat success and sell very well. one might think this should be enough for phase one to support the available small range of FE lenses within c1 ? no, after 1 1/2 years the only fe lense you find in the lens correction tool is the cheap 28-70.
0
-
I understand your disappointment. Have you filed a support case for FE lens support as a feature request already? I assume you did, but if not, I would like to encourage you to do so. 0 -
please, you really suggest they are not smart enough to find out by themselves what to do when a major player like sony bundles and features their software ? this whole file a support case game is only a polite way to say f""k you stupid... 0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
please, you really suggest they are not smart enough to find out by themselves what to do when a major player like sony bundles and features their software ? this whole file a support case game is only a polite way to say f""k you stupid...
That is not the point. It has to do with limited resources and feature requests helps to put it there where it is most needed or requested.0 -
this is not the point.... ? you are a kind person, you always come up with an explanation or reasons why phaseone is not able to deliver to their customers. but the point here is: if they don't have enough resources they should not have made this sony deal in the first place. to offer a dedicated software version without fully supporting the platform is beyond my understanding. but my guess is they figured out that this cheap little cameras are going to hurt their mf business more than they thought. but maybe you have another explanation why for example lifeview is still crippled with not showing the correct camera orientation ? so not supporting any pro level sony fe lens adds to this.... 0 -
Tethering and live view is implemented based on Sony software in CO8 and their firmware in camera. A mismatch between their software and firmware seems to be the root cause of some live view issues. Knock on Sony's door.
I can not change your mood or attitude. That is up to you. Sharing information and helping each other are the main values of a user-to-user forum. Any issues you have with Phase One should be addressed with them directly. And you know the drill how to do that.
I think I may assume that you have not yet filed a feature request for your FE lenses.0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
sony is bundling and featuring c1 for a while now. it also seems the a7 cameras in general are a gerat success and sell very well. one might think this should be enough for phase one to support the available small range of FE lenses within c1 ? no, after 1 1/2 years the only fe lense you find in the lens correction tool is the cheap 28-70.
you still can use OEM corrections that Sony writes in raw files... granted may be not as good as carefully hand crafted correction profiles created in house by P1, but still0 -
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
sony is bundling and featuring c1 for a while now. it also seems the a7 cameras in general are a gerat success and sell very well. one might think this should be enough for phase one to support the available small range of FE lenses within c1 ? no, after 1 1/2 years the only fe lense you find in the lens correction tool is the cheap 28-70.
you still can use OEM corrections that Sony writes in raw files... granted may be not as good as carefully hand crafted correction profiles created in house by P1, but still
thank you, i have overseen this but the "manufacture profile" applied correction for example to the 24-70 FE looks odd. this lens is sure not may favorit one but i need to use it for some applications and i dont like to use adobe just to get a undistorted image.0 -
@paul
digging deeper i have to say your stereotype bouncing and finger pointig to defend phaseone made me angry and as an effect i oversaw the real underlying problem.
c1 does not load the manufacturer profile although auto correction is activated, maybe becaus of meta data issues. i have to look into this. but worse c1 does load manufacturer profiles where i´m sure there is non available like certain metabone lens combinations. there is no field in this tab which shows what correction for what lens is really applied. not good.0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
c1 does not load the manufacturer profile although auto correction is activated, maybe becaus of meta data issues. i have to look into this. but worse c1 does load manufacturer profiles where i´m sure there is non available like certain metabone lens combinations. there is no field in this tab which shows what correction for what lens is really applied. not good.
In those situations, where I think you are saying that the Manufacturer embedded correction are applied, what do Sony do with their jpgs? Do they apply the lens corrections defined for the lenses any even though they may not be entirely valid when using an adapter?
There are some lens design philosophies around where it seems that the lens correction is not an optional enhancement for a slightly challenged image but rather a fundamental part of the lens design to be used under all circumstances.
What we then choose to do with that lens when taking it outside its manufacturer controlled environment is another matter entirely. I suppose it is not inconceivable that an complete correction database for all possible combinations of everything could be set up - but I doubt it would be cost effective for anyone to do so.
Grant0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
@paul
digging deeper i have to say your stereotype bouncing and finger pointig to defend phaseone made me angry and as an effect i oversaw the real underlying problem.
@Horseoncowboy,
A user-to-user forum has its limitations in terms of resolution of issues. Phase One support is the next step. When I believe that contacting them is the best course of action and in the best interest of the user, I will give that as my suggestion.
If you read my replies as a way to defend Phase One, you might want to read it again. I just tell what is common knowledge among users here and else. I do have my issues with Phase One, and I do take them up with them, not in public.
People posting here come from a very different professional and cultural background. Being polite is a way to keep the conversation rolling, even if you have different point of views. I respect yours and appreciate your sincere comments.0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
thank you, i have overseen this but the "manufacture profile" applied correction for example to the 24-70 FE looks odd. this lens is sure not may favorit one but i need to use it for some applications and i dont like to use adobe just to get a undistorted image.
if you need an undistorted image may be you just do not need to use any optics correction at all ? I do suggest using something RPP in this case - guaranteed absence of any distortion corrections 😂0 -
@ grant
good question but i never shoot jpg so i cant really answer this. but i think you could turn of lens correction in the a7 cameras if you have any doubts.
my problem is that when c1 finds lens metadata like say lens - 70-200 2,8 than it applies automatic lens correction and assumes it must be a sony lens, even when it is not the case. so everybody who shoots a a7 with lens adapters should be aware that c1 may use incorrect values for correction. the only solution i see is to turn this automatic behavior of, not very convenient. adobe works correct in this regard and is not fooled with unusual combinations it simply ignores it.
in general you would not easy run in this kind of problem because most camera systems are incompatible to each other . the sony a7 are really unique in this regard.
what i would like to see is an open standard for lens corrections and software to build them.0 -
@ paul
i sure was too rude so i want to apologize, sorry ! . but i use c1 almost ever day and i get really aggressive about all those annoyance i have to face. they did not even care to update their online manual to explain what a manufacturer lens profile is and how it is used by the software. i also refuse to file reports for things that should be common sense.0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
@ paul
i sure was too rude so i want to apologize, sorry ! . but i use c1 almost ever day and i get really aggressive about all those annoyance i have to face. they did not even care to update their online manual to explain what a manufacturer lens profile is and how it is used by the software. i also refuse to file reports for things that should be common sense.
We are fine. I understand your frustration, and sure agree with the lack of documentation in some areas. So not always defending, huh? 😉
Have a great day and (try to) enjoy Capture One. We would not want to do without it, still.0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
@ grant
good question but i never shoot jpg so i cant really answer this. but i think you could turn of lens correction in the a7 cameras if you have any doubts.
my problem is that when c1 finds lens metadata like say lens - 70-200 2,8 than it applies automatic lens correction and assumes it must be a sony lens, even when it is not the case. so everybody who shoots a a7 with lens adapters should be aware that c1 may use incorrect values for correction. the only solution i see is to turn this automatic behavior of, not very convenient. adobe works correct in this regard and is not fooled with unusual combinations it simply ignores it.
in general you would not easy run in this kind of problem because most camera systems are incompatible to each other . the sony a7 are really unique in this regard.
what i would like to see is an open standard for lens corrections and software to build them.
If Sony do the same as everyone else the jpg embedded in the RAW file for viewing in typical file browsing systems will be lens corrected. Or you could, as an experiment, shoot RAW + Jpg and compare the two. There are likely to be differences at the short end of a focal length. Not so much that is obvious at the medium to long end.
My Canon devices can offer up spurious meta dat values when attempting to read values for lenses that don't report any. Manual lenses without chips, of FD lenses through adaptors or recent fully manual lenses can all "mis-report" basic lens data but afaik I have not seen one apply corrections based on the mis-identification. That seems to rely on a known identification from the lens rather than guesswork based on .... well, who knows what?
If you are seeing corrective actions being applied based on pure guesswork that would indeed seem to be a wrong approach. If it was me in that position I would create a Support Case and seek an official explanation.
Grant0 -
[quote="Paul_Steunebrink" wrote:
That is not the point. It has to do with limited resources and feature requests helps to put it there where it is most needed or requested.
Hm, I was testing C1 and thinking about switching from Aperture. But this sentence worries me a bit. Limited ressources do sound like: There is not enough money...
And I don't want to start with C1 just to see that it will no longer be there within then next few years. I am really starting to thing about LR again although I don't like Adobe at all.0 -
[quote="gfingerl" wrote:
[quote="Paul_Steunebrink" wrote:
That is not the point. It has to do with limited resources and feature requests helps to put it there where it is most needed or requested.
Hm, I was testing C1 and thinking about switching from Aperture. But this sentence worries me a bit. Limited ressources do sound like: There is not enough money...
And I don't want to start with C1 just to see that it will no longer be there within then next few years. I am really starting to thing about LR again although I don't like Adobe at all.
Well, Apple hardly have "limited resources" but that has not helped you with Aperture ...
And just yesterday some update pestering from Adobe concerning Flash - definitely something to be updated whenever a new release is announced by all accounts if you want to improve system security - had me installing the latest release (I assume - who knows what they load up together with there attempts to add various "partner" products to unsuspecting systems) and now it seems that many adverts that are being thrown at the browser are causing Flash to Crash. Seems to happen just about every time there is an update. Should I assume that the developers are short of resources?
I think Paul was talking about people with the right skill sets and experience to undertake the work as Phase would wish to do it. That and basic cost effectiveness - the return of benefit to all for the amount of effort undertaken. A supply and demand model. In my experience large budget and a lot of developers does not begin to guarantee good code and applications. In fact often quite the opposite.
There is a huge danger in reading too much into comments in a web forum especially when taken out of context.
Nevertheless if that is a concern to you you will have to guess your own best options for the path to take. My personal opinion is that nothing can be guaranteed at any time from any organisation and I have to expect to respond if things go in the wrong direction from my personal perspective.
A benefit of not having a subscription model for software supply is that at least I have time on my side should something happen to a vendor's product and I find myself needing to move elsewhere.
Just my observations, for what they are worth.
Grant0 -
Hi Grant!
Thank you for your words and some good points you mentioned. I will wait for LR6 just to see whats new in there but at the moment C1 is my favorit.
Gerald0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
18件のコメント