Anyone shoot raw with the M.Zuiko 9-18mm?

Started Jul 13, 2011 | Discussions
OP dotborg Veteran Member • Posts: 8,251
Re: you must be kiddin.....

453C wrote:

mattmtl wrote:

jagge wrote:

discopolana wrote:

The picture you posted shows scene BEFORE correction, please use the recommended/supported raw converter (ACR, Olympus, etc.)

Are you serious. If this platform will be taken seriously then that is a ridiculous idea. RAW is the platform for serious shooters, and any converter should be applicable. Looks like bad lense design to me.

Why wouldn't serious shooters use raw converters that are fully compatible with the files created by their equipment? (Apart from special situations, such as when the person who posted this thread wants the barrel distortion in the uncorrected version.)

jagge, you've got it backwards. In this instance, the RAW converter is being manipulated to not apply software correction. If you manually defeat software correction or go out of your way to use a RAW converter that doesn't support your hardware, that's operator error , not bad design. Another car analogy: If you dump diesel into a gasoline engine because you know diesel has a higher energy density and want better fuel economy, whose fault is it when the engine sputters to a halt? Most of us would scratch our heads if someone did that and then complained about the end result, much as is being done over software corrected lenses.

I understand that optically pure lenses that don't require any software correction may be desirable for some, but the size, weight, and cost penalties are too high for many. Software correction is only going to become more prevalent as computing power increases. Those wanting to avoid it will find an ever decreasing number of options.

A lens that projects an image circle smaller than the sensor is bad design.

-- hide signature --
s_grins
s_grins Forum Pro • Posts: 11,778
Re: Anyone shoot raw with the M.Zuiko 9-18mm?

You will see some distortion, but not so profound as with 14-150
9-18 is optimized for wide angle
--
MFT in progress

 s_grins's gear list:s_grins's gear list
Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Art Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S +3 more
amalric
amalric Forum Pro • Posts: 10,839
Re: you must be kiddin.....

You should analyse the image: the diagonal is probably larger than a 9mm, say 8mm.

After distortion correction it becomes a 9mm, because the correction is lossy. The black corners are cut away, but the pixels at the edges are 'stressed'.

That is what happens at least when you linearise a 8mm fisheye in PS.

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads