rx100 the one to beat?

Started Feb 6, 2013 | Discussions thread
YiannisPP Senior Member • Posts: 1,622
Re: for the RAW shooters..

AdamT wrote:

Here`s an example ......... the Original RX JPG Field of view (after the De-barrel/Crop/Upsize) . the RAW converted only and the RAW converted and De-Fished in PT lens with the black bits cropped off (still giving mode than a 3:2 aspect)

Note how much extra there is at the edges . I think having to manually De-fish and then top & tail the image to around DSLR aspect is worth it for the extra wide and improved edge performance as well as not having detail damaged further from an upsize (which the JPG engine does) . .........

Hi Adam

Could you please explain this a little more? Presumambly when you say de-fish, you mean the same as de-barrel. Presumably you did exactly the same as what the jpeg engine does. That is stretch the corners (correct the barrel distortion) and then crop. What are the pixel dimensions of the third photo? Didn't you upsize? If you didn't then it's less than 20MP. In any case, in which step exactly did you gain the advantage of the wider view? It's all geometry. If your third photo shows that you can have a barrel-distortion-free image which is wider than the OOC jpeg, then that can only mean that the jpeg engine crops more than it needs to. Clearly. And that I would find strange, correcting distortion and cropping are operations that even the slow in-camera processor can do very fast. So I can't believe Sony got this wrong when they could've got it right without compromising anything.

Also, why would the corners in the third pic be better? Presumably you stretched them as much as the jpeg engine. Surely there can't be magic here!

Please explain.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow