Is this barrelling what was supposed to be firmware fixed?

frascati wrote:

From another review....

When converting raw files without correction, barrel distortion at wide angle is much higher, at about 2.8%.... Samsung's bundled Raw Converter software automatically reduces geometric distortion (as does Adobe Camera Raw), producing distortion results very similar to in-camera JPEGs. We expect high distortion at wide angle for smaller lenses though, so it's nothing to be overly concerned about unless you are using a raw converter which does not understand the embedded "opcodes" to perform distortion corrections automatically. There is however going to be some loss of resolution and possible interpolation artifacts as a result of such strong correction, because pixels in the corners of the frame are being "stretched" to correct for the distortion

I boldened the text.

So this will be corrected as a matter of course. Does not introduce another step as I worried about.

Is the bold script above possibly less of a concern since the last firmware update?

I'm not sure what the update did, or said it did...

Last update was claimed to remedy some of the firmware's handling of RAW barrel distortion.

I don't really understand how this relates, that would be fixing it for the raw -> jpeg conversion in camera, nothing to do with your raw -> jpeg conversions in outside software unless it's following the directives in the raw.

Anyone's experience?

It's never been much of a concern. The only people that that should really give pause to are perhaps serious landscape shooters that need the finest detail possible all the way out to the corners.

All considered what would be the point, at all, in correcting in-camera barrel distortion resulting from the lens design compromises (compactness, speed, etc) if it's simply shifting responsibility for this correction from earlier to later in the image processing chain?

I'm not sure I understood this question, could you rephrase it?

Seems illogical that in-camera correction prior to laptop RAW conversion would change the gist of the bold text above. No?

Right, it will not change it.

Additionally, shouldn't all in bold above apply to images shot in Jpeg? Some software/firmware must correct this lens's barrel distortion to wind up with a Jpeg in all cases.

Yes, absolutely.

Is EX2F's optical barrel distortion, in this class of camera, that bad comparatively?

No, I'll quote from what you quoted, "We expect high distortion at wide angle for smaller lenses though, so it's nothing to be overly concerned about."  It's expected because it is common.

Bottom line is that I'm trying to weigh all the pros/cons on this camera after three days of opening the box as early as possible to decide if it's a keeper.

Does a photographer learn to work within/around the limits of a camera's weak spots?

Yes, at least the good ones do.  The masters from long ago were dealing with many more limitations than we are now and still pulled off some great results.

Recognize the need to shoot at longer focal lengths when barreling effects are going to be too obvious in a shot with lots of geometric reference?

It's a consideration.

Alright, I was answering your questions as best I could through there, but I'm not sure I followed what you were asking all the way through.

Let's concern ourselves with only two processing paths, then we'll break down the 2nd one.

Path 1: shutter button -> raw -> in camera jpeg processing (which includes the distortion correction, and CA correction, white balance, filters, etc..) -> jpeg from the camera    This is what happens if you shoot jpeg, the raw is then discarded by the camera.  If you shoot raw+jpeg, then the raw file is also kept and you can use it for path 2.

Path 2: shutter button -> raw -> raw conversion software -> jpeg, or png, or tiff, etc..  This is the path for processing raws that you've been trying to add to your skillset.

Lets talk about the raw for a bit.  In addition to the image data the raw file can also contain data about the distortion and parameters for correcting it.  Some raw processors read this data and do it automatically, in some it is an option that must be selected, and in some the software doesn't know how to use the data.  Aside from this data in the raw, the software can get the information from another source, lens profiles, which are created for correction distortion, chromatic aberration, etc...  The lens profile may differ a little from the data in the raw file (it could be a better or worse correction than what the camera manufacturer does for the in camera jpegs).  In the case where the raw converter you're using can't handle the data in the raw, and can't use a lens profile (either because it doesn't support lens profiles at all or because a lens profile for your lens doesn't exist), then you may need to manually fix the distortion in the program (if it even supports that, some you're just entirely stuck with the distortion and would need to fix it in a different program after conversion), this is the only case that paragraph was implying to be concerned about.

Ok, so how we're going to deal with distortion in the raw file depends greatly on which raw conversion software you're using.  Basically though, it will usually amount to needing to check a box for lens corrections.

My favorite converter (Darktable) actually lacks many Samsung lens profiles, it uses the lensfun database, it's easy enough to have them add your lenses, but I would need to stop being lazy and send them in some sample shots of the right sorts of scenes.. I should do that sometime soon.