New S100 = lots of work

WOW What a learning curve, first the camera, all the new features and how best to set it up. I find I like P mode best, then AV mode, They tell me f4 for the sharpest shots, we will see. I like the control wheels, front for exposure comp, rear for ISO. Like my SD990 -1/3 ev is best as a starting point. The the battery life is poor, turned off GPS and (Power) Image stabilization.

PSE9 didn't work with Canon S100 raw, Re-learing CHDK with 8gb cards so I could use .DNG raw for PSE9 but I found that the wide angle images had quite a lot of barrel distortion that was corrected by the in camera image processor in JPEG and Canon raw but not in CHDK .DNG raw making CHDK .DNG raw unusable for me. I didn't see and distortion in my SD990 .DNG images, Oh well it's the final image that counts not what the camera does to get it and the S100 does a great job. I still use the features of CHDK like , batt %, DOF calc display, and save in Superfine jpeg mode, I don't know why Canon eliminated it but CHDK can give it back.

I found a back door loading method to load Adobe camera raw 6.6 into PSE9 and got that working with Canon S100 raw.

Now it's time to start shooting with this little Gem

Hans

hnikesch wrote in post #14532464
quite a lot of barrel distortion that was corrected by the in camera image processor in JPEG and Canon raw but not in CHDK .DNG raw making CHDK .DNG raw unusable for me.

hey, i was talking about that with on another thread. i was confused and was told that the canon raw is not suppose to be corrected. so i guess it is corrected for distortion on the s100?

if you want to convert s100 canon raws to dng, you can just use Adobe's free DNG converter tool.
http://www.adobe.com …ads/detail.jsp?​ftpID=5389

Yea Canon raw it is corrected quite a lot in the S100, I couldn't believe how much. See below the first image is CHDK raw and 2nd is Canon raw, both shot from exactly the same point and wide end of zoom. Based in some of the reviews also some noise reduction in the raw files. With Abobe camera raw 6.6 plugin the S100 works with PSE9

Hans

cool thanks. this will probably help out some people as some people want to compare the raw output of CHDK vs Canon Raw.

Like I stated above I didn't see this distortion on my SD900 or SD990 using CHDK raw

Hans

imjason wrote in post #14532484
hey, i was talking about that with on another thread. i was confused and was told that the canon raw is not suppose to be corrected. so i guess it is corrected for distortion on the s100?

if you want to convert s100 canon raws to dng, you can just use Adobe's free DNG converter tool.
http://www.adobe.com …ads/detail.jsp?​ftpID=5389

hnikesch wrote in post #14532510
Yea Canon raw it is corrected quite a lot in the S100, I couldn't believe how much. See below the first image is CHDK raw and 2nd is Canon raw, both shot from exactly the same point and wide end of zoom. Based in some of the reviews also some noise reduction in the raw files. With Abobe camera raw 6.6 plugin the S100 works with PSE9

Hans

imjason wrote in post #14532541
cool thanks. this will probably help out some people as some people want to compare the raw output of CHDK vs Canon Raw.

Clarification here. The CR2, raw, file is NOT corrected. However, DPP reads the camera and lens data and applies a correction before you see the image. The correction comes from within DPP (and from other applications that recognize the camera and have lens correction data supplied). There was a thread in here several months ago from someone who was doing HDR, IIRC, using a third-party application on the CR2 files from his S95 or S100 and seeing barrel distortion and wider FoV in the resultant images.

You are correct Jon, I have never used DPP, and ACR on PSE9 couldn't open the S100 .CR2 file so I saw distortion using CHDK .dng What is interesting is when using windows 7 explorer the CHDK .DNG file looks distorted but when I open the same file in Canon DPP the distortion is corrected but the CR2 file never looks distorted in anything that can open it (after downloading the new codec's).

As the final image is the result I am looking for I guess I don't care how it is achieved, great lens or good lens (with more range) and good software. It will be interesting what the future holds with software correction. I saw a while ago that Adobe is coming out with motion blur correction software.

What a time to be a shutter bug

Hans