Jump to content
ColinG

Fuji XT20 Lens - XC14-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS PZ

Recommended Posts

Just started to play with the beta and first thing I find is that the above Sony lens is not supported. It is not present in the released version of AP either. Why is that? it is a standard Sony kit lens. Cannot find any reference to my camera either, a Sony XT20. Is it not supported or am I missing a trick here?

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are unfortunately lots of Sony lense not supported.  AP has a library that they use to support lenses, i think it is called Lensfun.  Look it up, it’s here somewhere.  Sony lenses and camera seem to be difficult to profile.  I run their cameras and lenses, the cameras are supported but only one of my lenses is.  

And so it goes.  

Altogether though I don’t find it an issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet in the meantime Adobe and C1 either have the profiles (camera and lenses) or somehow use information baked into the raf file. Maybe that is what AP does?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lists of Affinity-supported cameras and lenses are here.

I'm a bit confused when you say "Sony" because as far as I can tell there is no such camera as a Sony CT20, except for an old Cyber-shot from 2007. (Forgive me if I'm wrong.) And the only "XC14-45" lens I can find is made by Fujifilm. The closest Fujifilm camera I can find to "CT20" is the XT20, which is on the Affinity list . 

Affinity uses the Lensfun database for lens correction data and the Fujifilm XC14-45 isn't listed there. Until that lens is added to Lensfun, it won't be supported by Affinity.


Affinity Photo 1.8.6,  Affinity Designer 1.8.6, Affinity Publisher 1.8.6, Mac OSX 11.0.1, 2018 MacBook Pro 15"

Betas as they happen... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for that and good spot. It is indeed Fuji XT20 which is a supported camera. Not sure what I was thinking when I typed Sony CT20! What is strange is that Lr says the lens profile is in the raf file. This being the case why does AP not use it I wonder? The  images do look good in AP though but I am still curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Exif metadata doesn't normally contain any direct information about lens distortion - just the make and model of the lens, if the camera recognises it.

You can see a pretty comprehensive list of Fujifilm and associated RAF tags at exiftool.org.

The XC14-45 is on the Develop list for Lensfun, which says it has been calibrated, but doesn't seem to have been added to the release version of Lensfun yet. I can't guess much more than that - if LR recognises it and corrects for distortion, it's probably because the Adobe gnomes have been hard at work...

EDIT - deep in that list of RAF tags is a tag called GeometricDistortionParams which I suppose may include lens distortion info. But Affinity doesn't get it from there...

Edited by h_d
Additional info

Affinity Photo 1.8.6,  Affinity Designer 1.8.6, Affinity Publisher 1.8.6, Mac OSX 11.0.1, 2018 MacBook Pro 15"

Betas as they happen... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, h_d said:

The Exif metadata doesn't normally contain any direct information about lens distortion - just the make and model of the lens, if the camera recognises it.

You can see a pretty comprehensive list of Fujifilm and associated RAF tags at exiftool.org.

The XC14-45 is on the Develop list for Lensfun, which says it has been calibrated, but doesn't seem to have been added to the release version of Lensfun yet. I can't guess much more than that - if LR recognises it and corrects for distortion, it's probably because the Adobe gnomes have been hard at work...

EDIT - deep in that list of RAF tags is a tag called GeometricDistortionParams which I suppose may include lens distortion info. But Affinity doesn't get it from there...

I guess that is the strength of outfits like Adobe or Phase One. That is not to decry AP, it is great software. What is strange though is that ON1 2021 recognises the lens and does an auto adjust and I thought they used Lensfun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, ColinG said:

 

Yet in the meantime Adobe and C1 either have the profiles (camera and lenses) or somehow use information baked into the raf file. Maybe that is what AP does?

 

And your last statement.  
I use CaptureOne 20 as well for my photo library. I also have tested out most of the other software and long ago gave up on Adobe products. Don't like subscriptions and snoops.  I don't know exactly what you are pointing to when you are comparing other software to AP but as I said before I find that even though two of my lenses are not listed, fe100400gm and fe70200gm I find that AP does a great job with both, very comparable to CaptureOne who partner with Sony.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought it obvious what I am comparing - it is quite simple to understand. AP does not have the lens profiles whilst others do. I question why and especially so as ON1 also have the profile and they too use Lensfun if I recall. Not sure why you felt it necessary to bash Adobe's subscription model. Completely off topic and unnecessary. People are free to exercise their choice any way they feel fit and do not need childish snipes, especially when Adobe's business model has nothing to do with the topic. Please do not bother responding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ColinG said:

Please do not bother responding. 

Yipe!  

 “Not sure why you felt it necessary to bash Adobe's subscription model. Completely off topic and unnecessary. People are free to exercise their choice any way they feel fit and do not need childish snipes, especially when Adobe's business model has nothing to do with the topic.”

Wasn’t bashing them just exercising my right to express my choice.  

Question? Why are you choosing to make an issue about AP and it’s lens profiles and comparing them to other products?

Please do not bother responding. 

Edited by p_mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, p_mac said:

Yipe!  

 “Not sure why you felt it necessary to bash Adobe's subscription model. Completely off topic and unnecessary. People are free to exercise their choice any way they feel fit and do not need childish snipes, especially when Adobe's business model has nothing to do with the topic.”

Wasn’t bashing them just exercising my right to express my choice.  

Question? Why are you choosing to make an issue about AP and it’s lens profiles and comparing them to other products?

Please do not bother responding. 

I had to respond because you are getting it all wrong and I thought I had made it clear earlier. You see, my comments are about what I see as an a deficiency in AP and a surprising one given the competition, one of which uses the same database. So completely on topic. Your comment re Adobe however was completely off topic and your choice is of no interest to me or of any relevance to my post.

End of debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ColinG said:

End of debate

Not quite.  
If you had checked, this issue has been brought up before, many times.  
The devs are not in the business of lense or camera definition. however James has done a help video on how you can do your own.  Take a look at it. 
Affinity uses the two sites that have been highlight above.  The web addresses are there for you to look at the sites as they are open for all to view.  If other software uses it they get exactly what is there. 
As far as CaptureOne they are the software part of PhaseOne who are developers of some pretty awesome camera equipment.  Sony is part of this effort.  
I have no idea what On1 is doing at this time, nor Adobe and if truth be told bringing these businesses up as comparison is irrelevant.  If people are not satisfied with anything they are to quote you "People are free to exercise their choice any way they feel fit …"
Affinity software is awesome and as far as it being competitive they are doing just fine.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.