Tamron lens not properly recognized
Locked
 
|
My new Tamron 70-300 mm F4–5,6 Di VC USD
is identified as a Canon EF 28-105 mm in Digikam!
I've looked at the same pictures in other programs: - UFRaw does the same (I guess it is "normal" as they both use the same library?) - RawTherapee calls it a 70-300 mm but from Canon! Focal length is OK. Is there a way to correct this? Or is it simply a matter for the next upgrade, or so? Thanks for your answers, Marie-Noëlle -- Une galerie photos, un blog ... pourquoi pas ? Webmaster en herbe Parcourez les Cévennes à ma façon : Cévennes Plurielles Et toutes mes autres publications à partir de ma page d'accueil générale _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
2011/5/23 Marie-Noëlle Augendre <[hidden email]> My new Tamron 70-300 mm F4–5,6 Di VC USD is identified as a Canon EF 28-105 mm in Digikam! Yes, Exiv2 library - RawTherapee calls it a 70-300 mm but from Canon!
_______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by tosca
Interesting, I never even lookt at it before. My Tamron lenses are
both named correctly Tamron so and so. The Sigma lenses are both
called just ¨Sigma¨. Maybe a common phenomenon, to have it not
exact. As long as you don´t know it doesn´t matter but now... if
there is a way to correct...
Rinus And this can not be because it are new lenses Op 23-05-11 15:13, Marie-Noëlle Augendre schreef: My new Tamron 70-300 mm F4–5,6 Di VC USD is identified as a Canon EF 28-105 mm in Digikam! _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gilles Caulier-4
2011/5/23 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>
-- Une galerie photos, un blog ... pourquoi pas ? Webmaster en herbe Parcourez les Cévennes à ma façon : Cévennes Plurielles Et toutes mes autres publications à partir de ma page d'accueil générale _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
In reply to this post by Gilles Caulier-4
on Monday 23 May 2011, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> 2011/5/23 Marie-Noëlle Augendre <[hidden email]> > > > My new Tamron 70-300 mm F4–5,6 Di VC USD is identified as a Canon EF > > 28-105 mm in Digikam! > > I've looked at the same pictures in other programs: > > - UFRaw does the same (I guess it is "normal" as they both use the same > > library?) > > > > Yes, Exiv2 library > > > > > - RawTherapee calls it a 70-300 mm but from Canon! > > Focal length is OK. > > > > Is there a way to correct this? Or is it simply a matter for the next > > upgrade, or so? > > > > Report this problem to Exiv2 bugzilla : http://www.exiv2.org > > Gilles Caulier Well, I see usually a list of possible lenses in the makernote section of the EXIF metadata (Sony A330). This makes me suspect it's *not* an error in the Exiv2 library, but caused by duplicate identifiers provided by the lens manufacturers; i.e. the exact lens used is not registered as a string containing a description, but as an integer value, decided by the lens manufacturer (and they don't seem to be talking too much with one another). So the best you can hope for is that the authors of the Exiv2 library add the name of the (unidentified) lens you used to their lists. I'd suggest attaching a full description of your lens and a RAW image to the bug report, so they can extract the data and pick up the proper ID code. The focal length seems to be encoded separately and independently of the lens ID (and at least for me, seems correct). (to illustrate: I get 1 ID string for my Sony kit lens, 2 for my Tamron 90mm macro and 8 (yes, eight) for my 70-300 mm Sigma, and those last 8 don't include the exact model... All this in the makernote section of the EXIF metadata) Remco _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
yes this is the problem for Sony camera with different lens (minolta, sony, tamron, sigma, etc...)
As i implemented Sony makernote in Exiv2, i can confirm this behavior. This is probably the same about other camera makernotes. I remember some thread about this subject with Andreas Huggel (Exiv2 lead developper), to handle lens maker and other metadata to wrap better lens description. I'm not sure if there is already a file in Exiv2 bugzilla, but if not, a new entry must be written about it. Gilles Caulier 2011/5/23 Remco Viëtor <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Remco Viëtor
2011/5/23 Remco Viëtor <[hidden email]> So the best you can hope for is that the authors of the Exiv2 library add the Thanks for your advice. I just added a picture to the bug report. Marie-Noëlle -- Une galerie photos, un blog ... pourquoi pas ? Webmaster en herbe Parcourez les Cévennes à ma façon : Cévennes Plurielles Et toutes mes autres publications à partir de ma page d'accueil générale _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
I had the change to confirm the things I wrote about Tamron and
Sigma lenses are the same under windows in another photomangement
tool.
So, if one is to blame itś probably the manufacturer. Would be interesting if you could do such a test. If the outcome is the same there is not to much hope for the future. Rinus Op 23-05-11 17:15, Marie-Noëlle Augendre schreef:
_______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
In reply to this post by tosca
Hi,
Perhaps, you (and the others who read this list) remember that in january I sent a post indicating the problem of incorrect lens recognition. It must be a recent change in exiv2, because with older foto I found that digikam recognized correctly the (same) lenses. Best regards, Michael Am Montag, 23. Mai 2011, 15:13:01 schrieb Marie-Noëlle Augendre: > My new Tamron 70-300 mm F4–5,6 Di VC USD is identified as a Canon EF 28-105 > mm in Digikam! > I've looked at the same pictures in other programs: > - UFRaw does the same (I guess it is "normal" as they both use the same > library?) > - RawTherapee calls it a 70-300 mm but from Canon! > Focal length is OK. > > Is there a way to correct this? Or is it simply a matter for the next > upgrade, or so? > > Thanks for your answers, > Marie-Noëlle _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Rinus
2011/5/23 sleepless <[hidden email]>
RawTherapee shows something different than UFRaw and Digikam; and even if the maker is wrong, the lens size is the right one. Marie-Noëlle -- Une galerie photos, un blog ... pourquoi pas ? Webmaster en herbe Parcourez les Cévennes à ma façon : Cévennes Plurielles Et toutes mes autres publications à partir de ma page d'accueil générale _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
on Tuesday 24 May 2011, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote:
... > RawTherapee shows something different than UFRaw and Digikam; and even if > the maker is wrong, the lens size is the right one. > Marie-Noëlle Exiftool under linux is fun as well: it gave a section 'composite' where there were 3 possibilities for my 70-300, all three present in the list that DigiKam/Exiv2 gave. So it picked up the lens ID and the focal lenght information was used to shorten the list. Remco _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by tosca
Op 24-05-11 09:39, Marie-Noëlle Augendre schreef:
If all have it wrong, I suppose it is not possible to identify it right. We probably have to live with it. Rinus
_______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Remco Viëtor
2011/5/24 Remco Viëtor <[hidden email]> on Tuesday 24 May 2011, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote: Thanks for the hint. I just tried exiftool and here is (part of) the result of the command exiftool -a -u -g1 IMG_8930.CR2 Lens : 70.0 - 300.0 mm Lens ID : Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di VC USD So the lens is recognized and the metadata are correct, no? Marie-Noëlle -- Une galerie photos, un blog ... pourquoi pas ? Webmaster en herbe Parcourez les Cévennes à ma façon : Cévennes Plurielles Et toutes mes autres publications à partir de ma page d'accueil générale _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote:
... > Thanks for the hint. I just tried exiftool and here is (part of) the result > of the command exiftool -a -u -g1 IMG_8930.CR2 > Lens : 70.0 - 300.0 mm > Lens ID : Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di VC USD > > So the lens is recognized and the metadata are correct, no? Looks like it :) I /think/ those fields are actually 'cooked' fields, derived from a combination of 'raw', stored, fields (among others, lensID, focal length as used and perhaps more) where the impossible matches for the lens ID are removed. To be really sure, I'd have to search through the code for exiftool and others like it... Remco _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
In reply to this post by tosca
On 25/05/11 13:45, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote:
> > Thanks for the hint. I just tried exiftool and here is (part of) the > result of the command exiftool -a -u -g1 IMG_8930.CR2 > Lens : 70.0 - 300.0 mm > Lens ID : Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di VC USD Just to add a false datapoint to the mix: $ exiftool -a -u -g1 DSC07242.JPG |grep -i lens Lens Type : Tamron or Sigma Lens (128) Lens ID : Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 I recently got a new Sigma 18-250 lens for my Sony Alpha camera. Definitely not a Tamron 28-300... I know it's quite a recent model for Sony Alpha mount, but if this stuff is reported wrong in some/most cases, what use is a lens database? You could always set it manually, but that's usually too much trouble. Would more accurate information be hidden in other fields (custom Sony fields?) Is there a way to help sort this out? Cheers Simon _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
Op 25-05-11 14:36, Simon Oosthoek schreef:
> On 25/05/11 13:45, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote: >> Thanks for the hint. I just tried exiftool and here is (part of) the >> result of the command exiftool -a -u -g1 IMG_8930.CR2 >> Lens : 70.0 - 300.0 mm >> Lens ID : Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di VC USD > Just to add a false datapoint to the mix: > $ exiftool -a -u -g1 DSC07242.JPG |grep -i lens > Lens Type : Tamron or Sigma Lens (128) > Lens ID : Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 > > I recently got a new Sigma 18-250 lens for my Sony Alpha camera. > Definitely not a Tamron 28-300... > I know it's quite a recent model for Sony Alpha mount, but if this stuff > is reported wrong in some/most cases, what use is a lens database? You > could always set it manually, but that's usually too much trouble. > exiftool (I picked that up from this discussion) gave in my case just ¨sigma¨ the same as seen in digikam. Shuttercount says 3154 where in digikam I see somthing like ¨245 52 241 87¨ Rinus > Would more accurate information be hidden in other fields (custom Sony > fields?) > Is there a way to help sort this out? > > Cheers > > Simon > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
In reply to this post by Simon Oosthoek-6
on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
> On 25/05/11 13:45, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote: > > > > Thanks for the hint. I just tried exiftool and here is (part of) the > > result of the command exiftool -a -u -g1 IMG_8930.CR2 > > Lens : 70.0 - 300.0 mm > > Lens ID : Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di VC USD > Just to add a false datapoint to the mix: > $ exiftool -a -u -g1 DSC07242.JPG |grep -i lens > Lens Type : Tamron or Sigma Lens (128) > Lens ID : Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 > > I recently got a new Sigma 18-250 lens for my Sony Alpha camera. > Definitely not a Tamron 28-300... > I know it's quite a recent model for Sony Alpha mount, but if this stuff > is reported wrong in some/most cases, what use is a lens database? You > could always set it manually, but that's usually too much trouble. > > Would more accurate information be hidden in other fields (custom Sony > fields?) > Is there a way to help sort this out? > The lens description values are already in the custom fields (makerdata). There's a (hard-coded) list of LensID values in the code. Those values are decimal values, with the integer part coding either a Minolta/Sony lens, or a third-party series of lenses. In the 2nd case, the exact lens is then supposed to be given by the decimal part. In your case, you have a LensType of 128.x. The 128 part indicates a Tamron or Sigma lens, and then there are 8 options in the list... (file Minolta.pm, then search for Tamron...) So it is quite possible that your lens, being new, isn't in the code base yet (but at least the brand is recognised...) And given how much cooperation open- source projects usually get from camera manufacturers, I'd say your best bet to get your lens included is sending a bug report with a ARW file and the exact name of your lens (or dig out the exact code yourself and send it with a lens description) Remco _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
Re: Tamron lens not properly recognized
|
|
Remco Viëtor wrote: > on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Simon Oosthoek wrote: > > On 25/05/11 13:45, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote: > > > Thanks for the hint. I just tried exiftool and here is (part of) the > > > result of the command exiftool -a -u -g1 IMG_8930.CR2 > > > Lens : 70.0 - 300.0 mm > > > Lens ID : Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di VC > > > USD > > > > Just to add a false datapoint to the mix: > > $ exiftool -a -u -g1 DSC07242.JPG |grep -i lens > > Lens Type : Tamron or Sigma Lens (128) > > Lens ID : Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 > > > > I recently got a new Sigma 18-250 lens for my Sony Alpha camera. > > Definitely not a Tamron 28-300... > > I know it's quite a recent model for Sony Alpha mount, but if this stuff > > is reported wrong in some/most cases, what use is a lens database? You > > could always set it manually, but that's usually too much trouble. > > > > Would more accurate information be hidden in other fields (custom Sony > > fields?) > > Is there a way to help sort this out? > > I had a (quick) look at the code. > The lens description values are already in the custom fields (makerdata). > There's a (hard-coded) list of LensID values in the code. Those values are > decimal values, with the integer part coding either a Minolta/Sony lens, or > a third-party series of lenses. In the 2nd case, the exact lens is then > supposed to be given by the decimal part. > > In your case, you have a LensType of 128.x. The 128 part indicates a Tamron > or Sigma lens, and then there are 8 options in the list... (file > Minolta.pm, then search for Tamron...) > > So it is quite possible that your lens, being new, isn't in the code base > yet (but at least the brand is recognised...) And given how much > cooperation open- source projects usually get from camera manufacturers, > I'd say your best bet to get your lens included is sending a bug report > with a ARW file and the exact name of your lens (or dig out the exact code > yourself and send it with a lens description) Sounds reasonable, but shouldn't tools report "unknown" if they need to rely on a built-in table, and a specific lens isn't found in the table? I could also imagine something like the PCI IDs database on SourceForge where people can sumbmit IDs for yet unknown devices: http://pciids.sourceforge.net/ The PCI IDs can then be updated online as an external file, from which PCI tools read the IDs and associated information. Since new lenses should not appear too often, maybe an "official" email address should be sufficient, where users could submit ID codes of new lenses which they have figured out using a certain exiftool command. The folks who receive the email can then add it to a simple file which could be updated online. Martin _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
«
Return to digikam-users
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |