Joining the EX1 club - first foliage

What similarities are there between the Ricoh and EX1?

Chris Dennehy wrote:

sherwoodpete wrote:

The difference in cropping of the RAW file depending on software is a bit odd.

I use the supplied Silkypix as well as RawTherapee. By default Rawtherapee does not apply any distortion correction, and gives a somewhat wider angle of view. But, even when the curved lines are straightened using the lens distortion correction in Rawtherapee, the angle of view is still a bit wider than silkypix.

But - it turns out that Silkypix too can give access to some of the extra pixels around the edges, by tweaking the cropping settings. I don't know why this isn't done by default.

Within Silkypix, one of the buttons in the cropping tool (pair of scissors) is titled: "Enable all data including invalid area in RAW data", and this allows access to the full image - but of course there is still the loss due to distortion correction.

Regards,
Peter

It's interesting to note that other RAW converters get the extra wide area as well, as MGJA said you can never have enough wide. I only new it happened when converted through DNG to Aperture.

I have a feeling that the RAW files are slightly warmer in colour than the jpeg.

The original tri-cap was developed by Ricoh for their GX100/200 series cameras on which I have always suspected the EX1 was based. Somebody in China realized a good thing when they saw it and the rest is history. The thing about the tri-cap is to get the tension on the springs just right so it will not impede the lens motor.
--
CD