This content has been marked as final. Show 31 replies
In File Info, Camera Data 1 lists any lens that is recent enough to communicate it's identity to the camera. This works on Pentax PEF's or DNG's even when run through the DNG converter.
This is because adobe didn't make additional effort to pull out lensID from obscure minolta maker note tags (as for example lightcrafts did in lightzone).
It's fair to say that Minolta (and now sony) are to blame too since they didn't done almost anything to help software developers in this respect (and not all minolta AF mount lenses do have unique lens ID).
However, companies like Adobe should do a better job here too IMHO.
It is worse than that. Most photo apps (Adobe is not unique) strip out the EXIF data and don't write it all back when you save to a different format. Adobe apps will store it in XMP format, but all the makernote EXIF data is gone. I like showing EXIF data on my web gallery, but can't preserve lens data on the processed images out of Adobe apps.
Lightroom don't recognize sony metadata lens. Windows explorer do it...Why Adobe don't do it.
strangely enough.. i have a lot of older pentax lenses that are identified perfectly via lightroom, but i just bought a brand new 50mm lens and it gets filed under unknown.. what gives?
Christian, (and others).
This sounds like a Lightroom issue. Try the Lightroom forum.
> "i have a lot of older pentax lenses that are identified perfectly via lightroom, but i just bought a brand new 50mm lens and it gets filed under unknown.. what gives?"
Adobe analyses Tag63 of the Pentax Makernote to identify the lens name, etc. There are potentially 2 problems here:
- Perhaps Adobe haven't yet updated their analysis for that new lens.
- Firmware 1.20 for the Pentax K10D changed the format of Tag63, and Adobe's current code no longer works for the new firmware. (I have raised a feature request for this).
I don't have a K10D, but I thought the latest firmware for that camera was version 1.3.
Anybody knowing how things work with KM/Sony?
> "I don't have a K10D, but I thought the latest firmware for that camera was version 1.3"
Yes. I have it on my PC but haven't installed it yet. I'll check whether it does the same to Tag63, but I expect it will. I think Pentax needed more space in the field, which is why they changed it from 2 to 3 bytes.
> "I'll check whether it does the same to Tag63, but I expect it will".
Yes, I've upgraded the camera, and confirmed that firmware 1.30 for the Pentax K10D uses the new 3-byte field for Tag63, (like firmware 1.20), hence Adobe products won't be able to interpret the lens information (yet).
actually im using an *ist D. thanks for the fiscal vot of confidence though. :)
i know its firmware is up to date as well...
>using an *ist D
In my opinion, the *istD is the best DSLR Pentax has ever produced, the K10D notwithstanding. I've had the *istD for a little over three years, and I had occasion to try the K10D extensively. The latter is a fine camera indeed, but I prefer the controls on the *istD, its PC sync contact, etc.
And the lenses are recognized. :)
do you have the FA50 F1.4?
that comes up as UNKNOWN in lighroom
> "In my opinion, the *istD is the best DSLR Pentax has ever produced, the K10D notwithstanding. I've had the *istD for a little over three years, and I had occasion to try the K10D extensively. The latter is a fine camera indeed, but I prefer the controls on the *istD, its PC sync contact, etc".
Certainly its PC contact is something to be missed! (And its noise characteristics are better for some purposes).
Some aspects of the K10D are personal - I found the *istD too small for my hands, coming from a Z-1P. But others like the size.
I like the shake reduction of the K10D, especially with my old F 300mm f/4.5 ED(IF). And the faster write-to-card speed has proved useful for studio work, animals, and sports.
My *istD isn't retired or sold - it is my back-up and "always with me" camera.
>I found the *istD too small for my hands, coming from a Z-1P.
The grip is always attached to mine. It feels better that way. I continue to shoot with my old Leica and Contax rangefinder, so the size of the body is not an issue for me.
Shake reduction is very desirable, as is the write speed. However, those two features are not enough to overcome the deficiencies in control ergonomics.
And I definitely like the images of the 6.2 megapixel sensor much better than the ones produced by 10 smaller megapixels crammed into the same size sensor,
The 3200 ISO setting on the *istD has saved my assets on more than one occasion. On the K10D I was unhappy with the quality of ISO 800. :(
> "The grip is always attached to mine. It feels better that way".
True - I have one, although I don't always use it. But it doesn't cater fully for long fingers, which is my specific problem.
I don't normally use high ISO. As I said earlier about the *istD: "its noise characteristics are better for some purposes", so I agree with you about the high ISO case. But, with shake reduction, I am able to use ISO 100 often, and then it isn't a problem.
I don't have a major hang-up about megapixels. I believe that, for printing at A3, I really need "5 million good pixels", and with careful composition I can get that with the *istD. I have had a lot of success with it, and have no intention of selling it or retiring it. And I have seen stunning pictures others have taken with their's - while the world is going a bit megapixel mad, there are lots of people winning competitions and being accepted in international exhibitions who manage perfectly well with 6 MP.
glad to hear theres such a strong fan base of the ol' *ist D.
felt pretty isolated about my fanaticism for5 it for a bit there.
The *istD would have sold a lot better had Pentax not bundled it with arguably the ugliest lens ever produced by Pentax, the 18-35mm zoom, and if it had had slightly better firmware that showed the histogram right off the bat when the image is first displayed on the LCD. Other than that, I think its features are enough to overcome any advantages of subsequent models.
If my two *istD bodies were to be stolen or damaged, I'd still buy a *istD before any other Pentax DSLR. I'd buy it over any Canon or Nikon DSLR in its range too.
> "The *istD would have sold a lot better had Pentax not bundled it with arguably the ugliest lens ever produced by Pentax, the 18-35mm zoom"
I guess there is no point in trying to sell you my 18-35mm zoom ...!
(Fortunately, I later bought the 16-45 f/4).
3200 ISO ?!?!?
mine will only go to 1600.. is there something im missing? i have firmware version 1.12
>I guess there is no point in trying to sell you my 18-35mm zoom ...!
Oh, for about US $45 I will consider it to add the widest end to my Pentax 35mm film camera bodies. ;)
Yes, absolutely ISO 3200. From day one. It was one of the selling points from the very beginning.
Read your manual. It's been a while, but I kind of remember you have to enable it in one of the menu settings.
sensitivity range...... THANKS!
do you use sensitivity correction with that?
Sometimes, sure. When I'm shooting under extreme conditions and going from decently lit spots to very dark areas in a forest in a matter of seconds (during the wedding of mi goddaughter), for instance.
There's a surprisingly simple solution to the "Lightroom doesn't know Minolta lenses" problem, at least if you have a Mac and your pictures are in DNG format (should work with Windows, too, but I'm not so sure about other formats than DNG)...
1) get and install exiftool (http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/)
2) open Terminal
3) type in
exiftool -m -r '-lensId>lens' LOCATION_OF_YOUR_PICTURES -overwrite_original_in_place
(careful, the quotes have to be there, and of course you have to replace LOCATION_OF_YOUR_PICTURES with the folder you want to change)
4) In Lightroom, select your pictures and select "Read Metadata from File"
The downside: You have to do this again for each new folder you create in Lightroom, but until Adobe finally gets the lens feature working for non-mainstream cameras, it's better than nothing.
The problem of the lens data for minolta/sony cameras is the lens ID codes have lots and lots of overlaps. Mostly because Sigma released lenses that duplicate lots of the Minolta lenses ID codes. So for many lens IDs in the file, it is impossible to know what lens was really used.
Dana Gartenlaub wrote:
> In File Info, Camera Data 1 lists any lens that is recent enough
> to communicate its identity to the camera. This works on Pentax
> PEFs or DNGs even when run through the DNG converter.
It may work this way with Pentax PEF files but unfortunately doesn't with Minolta MRW or Sony ARW files. Of course, Minolta AF (and now Sony Alpha) lenses do report their identities to the camera, and the camera does write this info into the EXIF data but it ends up as an obscure lens ID in the Minolta (or Sony) Maker Notes where most 3rd-party software (including Adobe's) cannot (or would not) access it.
Eric DeSilva wrote:
> Adobe apps will store it in XMP format, but all the makernote
> EXIF data is gone.
This is not true! Adobe XMP won't read the Maker Notes sections but it does preserve them. When I convert an MRW file to DNG (with Adobe DNG Converter) and then create a TIFF or JPEG file from the DNG (with Camera Raw) then the Minolta Maker Notes will still be present in the final TIFF or JPEG file (and of course in the DNG file, too).
Thomas Knoll wrote:
> The problem of the lens data for Minolta/Sony cameras is the
> lens ID codes have lots and lots of overlaps. Mostly because
> Sigma released lenses that duplicate lots of the Minolta lenses
> ID codes.
Sigma lenses don't have Minolta/Sony lens IDs but just random numbers. Kindly ignore what Sigma lenses do. And please don't bother which lens 'was really used.' Just provide us with the lens ID found in the EXIF Minolta/Sony Maker Notes data. Please!
Currently, I enter the names of the Minolta/Sony lenses manually into the metadata. I customized my File Info Panel 'Camera Data 1' so I can enter the data there in a fairly comfortable way. This is not too hard to do because usually I am using no more than two or three different lenses per assignment usually. This way, the lens names go into the exif/1.0/aux tag named 'Lens.' Unfortunatey, due to a bug in Bridge or in XMP, raw files and DNG files won't accept changes in this and a few more tags; only TIFF and JPEG files will. Instead, the change will get stored in Bridge's cache only. So I wrote a Bridge script to manipulate the XMP sidecar files' contents directly, to 'burn' the changes from the volatile cache permanently into the disk files' metadata.
All this would become *much* easier when 1) we had access to the lens ID in the Minolta (or Sony) Maker Notes and 2) someone would eventually care about fixing that $#!+ metadata bug in Bridge (or XMP) which was already there in Bridge 1.0 and still is around in Bridge 2.1.
How to color correct with adobe cs3 after effect. How to deal with each color independently. I window xp.
Sorry, I'm not sure what this question has to do with lens data in EXIF.
Is your question about Photoshop or about After Effects? Please post your question in the appropriate forum and add more info.
Photoshop Forums: http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bbf2764/
AFter Effects Forum: http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.ee6b2fe/