jaapv Posted July 12, 2013 Share #121 Â Posted July 12, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I would say that the firmware correction is certainly inferior to flat-field corrections in raw conversion. Those use a comparison image to recalculate the image file, whilst the camera can only apply a general selective amplification and colour shift. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Wideangles magenta shift. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
terrycym Posted July 12, 2013 Share #122 Â Posted July 12, 2013 Talking of CornerFix, I downloaded it and had a very quick play with it. It lets you open a DNG and save the results to a new DNG, how do the corrections get added? Does it add stuff to the metadata like Adbe Camera Raw does? ACR lets you revert changes so you end up with the file before the ACR corrections. Does ACR see the CF corrections via the metadata or does it actually alter the image within the DNG container? If the latter then I suppose one ought to save the out of camera DNGs too, yes? Â Too many questions... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 13, 2013 Share #123 Â Posted July 13, 2013 Does ACR see the CF corrections via the metadata or does it actually alter the image within the DNG container? Â It alters the pixel data. If you are worried about preserving the holy original sensor data, then disable in-camera correction as it alters the pixel data too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted July 13, 2013 Author Share #124 Â Posted July 13, 2013 Talking of CornerFix, I downloaded it and had a very quick play with it.It lets you open a DNG and save the results to a new DNG, how do the corrections get added? Does it add stuff to the metadata like Adbe Camera Raw does? ACR lets you revert changes so you end up with the file before the ACR corrections. Does ACR see the CF corrections via the metadata or does it actually alter the image within the DNG container? If the latter then I suppose one ought to save the out of camera DNGs too, yes? Â Too many questions... Â Don't know. Don't care. It works and works well. Seems pretty good to me. ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted July 13, 2013 Share #125 Â Posted July 13, 2013 With CornerFix you need to save the out-of-camera DNG, as the developer Sandy confirms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etruscello Posted July 14, 2013 Share #126 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Point of clarification, please: Does the problem described here on the new M relate only to the CV 12mm M Mount, or is the CV 12mm Screw Mount with M-adapter equally affected? Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 14, 2013 Share #127  Posted July 14, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Point of clarification, please: Does the problem described here on the new M relate only to the CV 12mm M Mount, or is the CV 12mm Screw Mount with M-adapter equally affected? Tom  It will be equally bad on the M240 with current firmware, as the light rays from the very rearward exit pupil will impinge on the sensor at the same very acute angle. Even on the M9, using the 21mm/2.8 Elmarit-M correction, you still need a fair bit of PP correction for the 12mm CV lenses, mainly for vignetting.  Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted July 14, 2013 Share #128  Posted July 14, 2013 Point of clarification, please: Does the problem described here on the new M relate only to the CV 12mm M Mount, or is the CV 12mm Screw Mount with M-adapter equally affected? Tom  The optical cells are identical... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jankap Posted July 15, 2013 Share #129 Â Posted July 15, 2013 I would say that the firmware correction is certainly inferior to flat-field corrections in raw conversion. Those use a comparison image to recalculate the image file, whilst the camera can only apply a general selective amplification and colour shift. Â Leica are instrument makers, no programmers. I could imagine, that a Cornerfix - made by Leica= Leicafix - could be very useful. Leica exactly knows the properties of the lenses. The photographer could bring in the exact f-stop used for the picture. Distorsion, vignetting, etc. could be compensated exactly. Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 15, 2013 Share #130 Â Posted July 15, 2013 It has nothing to do with that. With in-camera firmware correction the camera can only shift values per pixel on fixed parameters. With flat field correction the software will use another reference image for the correction, being more precise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted July 15, 2013 Share #131 Â Posted July 15, 2013 Leica are instrument makers, no programmers.I could imagine, that a Cornerfix - made by Leica= Leicafix - could be very useful. Leica exactly knows the properties of the lenses. The photographer could bring in the exact f-stop used for the picture. Distorsion, vignetting, etc. could be compensated exactly. Jan ... or perhaps just provide the profiles to Adobe for integration in LR? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted July 15, 2013 Author Share #132 Â Posted July 15, 2013 ... or perhaps just provide the profiles to Adobe for integration in LR? Â Because we all use Lightroom ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 15, 2013 Share #133 Â Posted July 15, 2013 Speak for yourself - I thoroughly dislike the program... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted July 16, 2013 Share #134 Â Posted July 16, 2013 To be fair, it's not that I dislike LR so much, I just clearly prefer C1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted July 16, 2013 Share #135 Â Posted July 16, 2013 Fair enough, guys - I also use C1 occasionally. Replace "Adobe" and "LR" in my post above with "SW providers" and "raw converters" if that makes you feel better. That being said, it seems that Leica currently has a commercial partnership agreement with Adobe, not P1... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share #136 Â Posted July 16, 2013 Fair enough, guys - I also use C1 occasionally. Replace "Adobe" and "LR" in my post above with "SW providers" and "raw converters" if that makes you feel better.That being said, it seems that Leica currently has a commercial partnership agreement with Adobe, not P1... Â I use MS paint. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etruscello Posted July 16, 2013 Share #137 Â Posted July 16, 2013 To explain my last question: I assumed there may be a magenta shift difference between the CV12mm f4.5 Screw Mount with M-adapter vs the newer M-Mount because of reviews that claim the the M-mount lens is softer in the corners. My CV 12mm Screw Mount shows no magenta shift on an M-E; therefore, I wondered if it would be the better of the two on an M Type 240 camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share #138 Â Posted July 16, 2013 To explain my last question: I assumed there may be a magenta shift difference between the CV12mm f4.5 Screw Mount with M-adapter vs the newer M-Mount because of reviews that claim the the M-mount lens is softer in the corners. My CV 12mm Screw Mount shows no magenta shift on an M-E; therefore, I wondered if it would be the better of the two on an M Type 240 camera. Â I'm not very techie.. but I too had the 12mm (albeit the new version) on the M-E and it was pretty good with regards to colour.. it vignetted like heck but I kinda like that.. but the 12mm on the M240 is a bitch to be honest. Â I was really disappointed with it - but then I tried cornerfix and it's amazing. It removes the magenta AND vignetting but the vignette is easy to put back if needed. Â For whatever the reason it seems likely the only way to remove the Magenta for the foreseeable future is to use software. However I'm really pleased with the results from the lens with the software fix. Â If you want to see a 'corrected' image have a look here..I re-added the vignetting. Â http://www.satureyes.com/img/s10/v108/p1676693970-6.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 16, 2013 Share #139 Â Posted July 16, 2013 ^Fantastic image....made me smile:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share #140 Â Posted July 16, 2013 For those interested. I've created a gallery of the shots from the M240 that I shot over a 3 evening period. I've selected a few of them.. I've added the EXIF data so you can see the details. Â I think the f-stops may not be accurate in the EXIF. The shots labelled XXXXX_CF were shot with the 12mm Voigtlander and corrected in CornerFix. Â I also used the EVF for my 21mm and 12mm shots. Â Hope you enjoy - and comment as much as you like! Â satureyes photography | Henley Festival Leica Gallery | L1000300 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.