Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

This is a very specific request about Canon DPP, not about the many other wonderful products that are out there. Please by all means make other suggestions, but I would appreciate it if this thread did not become a debate about which processing tools are superior.

This is a repost, originally in the post-processing section that only got a couple of responses.

I am relatively new to the DSLR game ( 3years ) although not to photography in general (my first Canon SLR was an AE-1 in a 1976) and currently use a T3i with a few other things wrapped around it. Some of those wrappings are Canon manual focus lenses modified to work on EOS DSLRs with Ed Mika conversions: FL 55mm f/1.2, FD 135mm f/2.0, FD 35-105mm f/3.5, FD 500mm reflex f/8.0, and also a Samyang 8mm fisheye.

As all DPP users know, not only do we have differences with 'legacy' equipment support between DPP 3.x and DPP 4.x, but many current Canon lenses are not (yet) supported in DLO, and many older ones or off brand lenses probably never will be.

I have been playing with EXIF data in raw (.CR2) files using EXIFtool and it's associated GUI tool for Windows and also PhotoMe.

So far I have been able to create EXIF profiles with EXIFtoolGUI to at least display the actual lens descriptions etc. in DPP 3.x, so that something taken with say, an FD 135mm f/2.0 lens shows up as that. However that doesn't allow switching on the lens optimizations in DPP.

Using PhotoMe together with Canon lens tag numbers I have been able to (file by file) set the lens type, short and long focal length numbers to a supported lens type such as the EF 135mm F2L, and then use the lens optimization capabilities. Similarly for my other unsupported lenses. It is definitely an interesting experiment.

Have others tried this approach with Canon DPP and if so do you have any thoughts or guidance to offer?

The EXIF editing tools I am using seem to be fairly old (or at least the Windows GUI based versions), and not being maintained regularly so there may be better approaches.

Many thanks for any thoughts or ideas.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Did I understand you right, you want to change the meta data/lens pofile of one lens to make the program believe it is a different lens, so you can use the lens corrections of the program? I don't think that works, you can change the characters all you want, the program is not reading the naming of the file, but the file itself (it is imbedded in the pixels)!

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Canon USA Contact Us
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/standard_display/contact_us_pro

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Actually it does work. Apparently DPP reads the lens type data in the EXIF file along with the short and long focal length fields when deciding whether or not to enable the lens optimizer functionality. I spent a bunch of time over the weekend experimenting with lenses that are not supported - all of which are old lenses - FL/FD lenses adapted to EF mounts with a chip. First pass I was able to edit the EXIF data and at least have that show up in DPP info. Then, using a second tool use a lens identifier tag that would fool DPP into thinking it was a supported lens, so for example I have pictures taken with an FL 55mm f/1.2 lens that DPP would identify as EF 50mm f/1.2L and allow the DLO options to activate.

I have done similar things with other old unsupported lenses, so it can be done and does work. It's a kludge, but interesting.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Err? and the point of that is? I'm looking at unsupported stuff!

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

You know know what you'll get until you ask.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

nice to hear it is working.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

[quote=Peterff]This is a very specific request about Canon DPP, not about the many other wonderful products that are out there. Please by all means make other suggestions, but I would appreciate it if this thread did not become a debate about which processing tools are superior.


Too much time on your hands.
Go out and take some photos instead.

mrtobin Loc: North East Ohio

But won't you be making lens corrections for a lens that you did not use? So, you use lens "A" and you want canon dpp to make a correction for lens "B"? Do's not seem to make sense to me.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

makes good sense to me

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

[quote=Architect1776]

Apparently I have time to do something that I personally consider useful, that enables me to unlock and use some of the capabilities in DPP to work on images that otherwise would be blocked because the lens was not identified as supported. So far I have found the results beneficial.

Perhaps you are not a believer in doing post-processing or finding ways to get the most out of available tools.

How you spend your time is of course, your own choice. Enjoy!

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

You are correct that the lens corrections will not be a complete match, but there are other tools that get unlocked that provide additional capabilities that I have already found to deliver some useful results. Even if the lens data is not an exact match, it may be able to deliver some use.

There have been many questions from people wondering if they can get DPP (or other tools) to operate on unsupported lenses, either older models or off brand lenses such Sigma or Tamron. Your mileage may vary of course, but having the option does no harm in my opinion.

After all discussions about JPEG vs raw where we have now seen demonstrable evidence that raw really does provide additional capability - for those that didn't just accept that - I decided that being able extend the capabilities of DPP to my older lenses or maybe my Samyang fisheye could be useful, at least in some situations.

It takes about 10 to 15 seconds to modify the EXIF data for any raw (.CR2) file, and suddenly I have more tools available. I spent time on Sunday doing the research and experimentation which I now consider to be time well spent, since I can now make some noticeable improvements to pictures I took three or more years ago.

Now, it may be that I could do all of that with Lightroom or Photoshop, but I'd have to invest time to learn how to do that as well, and might still not have exact lens profiles available, especially for lenses made prior to 1987.

I appreciate the constructive responses, suggestions and questions that are being made. This topic may not be of much interest to other people, but at least now I am finding out. Thanks.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

You are right.
I spend time taking photos and do the best I can in camera like I did with film.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

No worries, I agree with getting the best result in camera, which I have also tried to do since the early days with film. I also enjoyed doing darkroom work and the additional flexibility that gave. Although I don't have a lot of time for PP work, I have found it beneficial for some of the images that I wish to print / hang on the wall etc.

Take care!

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

I also have canon Fd lenses that I have not as yet used them with my 7d. Does the adapter work well with the legacy lenses? Is it worth getting them. Manual shooting is not a problem as I have use manual in my Canon F1 for decades. I know that this does not address your request, but I would appreciate your opinion. Thanks. By thee way I use DPP all the time but I have not tried ti change the lens info.