diglloyd
Welcome to diglloyd.com
In-depth review coverage is by subscription.
Also by Lloyd: MacPerformanceGuide.com and WindInMyFace.com
First-time visitor
In Motion There is Great Potential
Deal Zone, Great Deal Every Day
View BEST Deals Right Now

Panoramas with the iPhone

Methinks the incredible ease of use and fabulous display of the iPhone 6s Plus make a strong argument for a solution that doesn’t suck among real cameras (all of them do... for example, the Sony A7R II bangs the shutter violently when taking a pano). But most impressive of all, the iPhone 6s Plus actually makes panos with moving people in it without blurring the person.

Yes, I’m shooting my regular cameras up here, but a few random sample panos from iPhone 6s Plus. It is so easy to whip it out of a pocked and have a pano done in a tiny fraction of the time and hassle of any conventional camera that I use. I don’t much care for the image quality of iPhone stills, or the lack of control or blowing-out of details and exposure problems, but as a tool that “pounds a nail”, it sinks it most every time with minimal effort—thus the vaue is high as a real tool.

Lee Vining Marina Fire Begins
__METADATA__
Sunrrise at Junction Campground
__METADATA__
Unicorn and Capricorn Peaks from Pothole Dome
__METADATA__
Spring Snowmelt Down Granite Slope
__METADATA__
Fresh Snow, White Mountains
__METADATA__

Moving subjects are dealt with adroitly by the iPhone panorama feature.

Lunch at the Campground
__METADATA__
Cerro Gordo Road
__METADATA__
 
MacPerformanceGuide.com

Hasselblad X1D-50C: 50-Megapixel Mirrorless Medium Format

Kudos to Hasselblad for being first to bring out a mirrorless medium format camera, the about $9000 Hasselblad X1D-50C along with about $2295 Hasselblad XCD 45mm f/3.5 and about $2695 Hasselblad XCD 90mm f/3.2.

I expect to have the X1D for review in early August, on loan from B&H Photo.

Hasselblad X1D-50C overview

Pity there is no SuperRes pixel shift mode as found on the Pentax K1. SuperRes pixel shift mode quite matches X1D for image quality due to the true-color pixels of pixel shift mode. But that is speculation only at present, and pixel shift mode has strict limitations on subject movement. One wonders why Pentax with its excellent technology imn the 645Z and K1 did not debut a mirrorless medium format camera first.

Specifications for the EVF and rear LCD are run of the mill—less good on the EVF than the Leica SL, and less good on the rear LCD than the Nikon D5. But where it counts, the sensor quality should be fabulous.

  • 50MP 43.8 x 32.9mm CMOS Sensor
  • 16-Bit Color, 14-Stop Dynamic Range
  • Hasselblad Natural Color Solution
  • Full HD 1080p H.264 Video at 25 fps
  • ISO 100-25600, Shooting Up to 2.3 fps
  • Central Shutter: 60 min to 1/2000 sec
  • 2.36MP XGA Electronic Viewfinder
  • 3.0" 920k-Dot Touchscreen LCD Monitor
  • Dual SD Card Slots; XPan & Square Modes
  • Built-In Wi-Fi & GPS, USB 3.0 Type C
Hasselblad X1D-50C

Description

Determined to shake up the photographic industry, Hasselblad has unleashed a world's first in the form of the X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless Digital Camera. This camera takes the well-regarded 50MP 43.8 x 32.9mm CMOS sensor found in numerous medium format systems and incorporates it into a revolutionary mirrorless camera body. Designed and handmade in Sweden, this camera is a precision tool with exceptional ergonomics and a compact size that even rivals smaller format systems. Taking this system above and beyond the rest is a large sensor that works hand-in-hand with the Hasselblad Natural Color Solution to create phenomenal raw images with smooth tonal gradations thanks to 16-bit color depth and 14 stops of dynamic range.

Image quality is superb, and Hasselblad's electronic system is capable of capturing clean images within a sensitivity range of ISO 100-25600, while also being able to capture photos at a rate of up to 2.3 fps. Moving a bit beyond pure image quality, the X1D embraces the Hasselblad Central Lens Shutter, enabling shutter speeds as long as 60 minutes or as short as 1/2000 second, with flash sync possible at every speed. Additionally, to make the camera more versatile, Full HD 1080p video at 25 fps using H.264 compression is possible.

Moving into operational details, the X1D embraces mirrorless design by incorporating a 2.36MP XGA electronic viewfinder that permits natural, eye-level monitoring with the added advantage of overlays and programmable information in direct sight. One such feature would be the ability to shoot in various aspects with a view that compensates for such changes, including square or the classic XPan panoramic format. Alongside this EVF is a 3.0" 920k-dot touchscreen LCD on the rear that permits intuitive operation of all of the camera's features and settings.

For more physical and tactile use, the X1D offers front and rear dials as well as a mode dial which can be locked into a recessed position to prevent accidental changes when it is in your bag. There are also dual SD card slots for backup, organization, or just having extra storage. Bringing the system into the modern age is built-in Wi-Fi and GPS, allowing for remote connection and file transfer as well as instant geotagging of your files. Additionally, it has Mini HDMI, audio input and output, and a super-fast USB 3.0 Type C connection.

Hasselblad X System

Introducing mirrorless medium format, Hasselblad's X system takes the outstanding quality of a larger sensor and manages to create a compact, yet uncompromising camera that will deliver almost unparalleled image quality. It is designed and made in Sweden and draws inspiration from the company's legendary V system. Also, making use of the mirrorless design and a central lens shutter, system noise is kept to a minimum for shooting without disturbing your subject.

50MP CMOS Sensor

Revolving around a large 50MP CMOS sensor, measuring 43.8 x 32.9mm, the X1D-50c is capable of capturing an extremely wide dynamic range of up to 14 stops along with vivid 16-bit color depth. When combined with the Hasselblad Natural Color Solution, tonal transitions and skin tones show immense depth, detail, and clarity for lifelike image quality, even in dark shadow and bright highlight regions. To suit working in a variety of lighting conditions, a sensitivity range of ISO 100-25600 is available, and still files are saved in the Hasselblad 3FR raw file format.

Hasselblad Natural Color Solution — Working with the spectacular image quality of the 50MP CMOS sensor, the Hasselblad Natural Color Solution is designed to deliver images with the most natural color without needing to delve into a variety of presets. This system is also capable of creating imagery with exceptionally smooth tonal transitions that are reminiscent of analog film capture, which is thanks in part to the X1D's 16-bit color depth.

Hasselblad Central Lens Shutter — Able to accelerate to open and close exceptionally quickly and reliably while also using minimal power, the central lens shutter mechanism offers numerous advantages for photographers. Namely, flash sync is possible at all shutter speeds up to 1/2000 second. The shutter is also in a ready state at all times for near instant response and it causes virtually no vibration at longer exposures. Additionally, it is durable and rated to beyond 1,000,000 exposures.

Full HD Video Recording — In addition to high-resolution stills shooting, the X1D can also record Full HD 1080p video at 25 fps. Video can be saved in the H.264 compressed format for greater editing flexibility with a variety of software options. For further video recording capabilities, the X1D offers 3.5mm audio input and output jacks as well as a Mini HDMI port for monitoring.

System Design and Connectivity — Built-in 3.0" 920k-dot touchscreen LCD affords intuitive control over settings navigation and adjustment, and also permits bright, clear live view monitoring.

• Integrated 2.36MP XGA electronic viewfinder permits natural eye-level viewing as well as the ability to display overlays and additional information clearly and effectively during shooting. It also displays the capture area when set to shoot 39MP square format or XPan panoramic images.
• USB 3.0 Type-C connector offers transfer speeds of up to 5 Gbps for quick and responsive tethered live view and stills capture.
• In addition to tethered shooting, dual SD memory card slots are incorporated into the side for flexible storage capabilities. Multiple options are available for maximum flexibility, including the ability to save all images to one card and automatically switch to the other when it is full as well as save RAW images to card 1 and JPEG to card 2.
• Benefitting video applications, a Mini HDMI port permits use of an optional external monitor for clear monitoring. Additionally, 3.5mm audio in and out ports are provided for more flexible control over audio recording during video.
• Built-in Wi-Fi enables working with an iOS mobile device and the Phocus Mobile app for remote camera control, wireless image previews, and file browsing.
• GPS allows shooters to automatically have geolocation embedded in the image files for tracking where you took some of your best shots.
• Optimized for use with XCD series of lenses which offer an integrated central shutter system capable of sync speeds up to 1/2000 sec.
• Optional adapter provides compatibility with the updated range of HC and HCD lenses, which feature an improved leaf shutter unit for increased shutter and flash sync speeds of up to 1/2000 sec.
• Weather and dust sealing ensures this system can stand up to all environmental conditions professionals find themselves in.

Phocus 3.1 is a free image processing software that complements the X1D's capabilities, and enables raw file processing for both stills and video, as well as a range of editing capabilities, including automatic moiré detection and the ability to work with adjustment layers for applying exposure, white balance, and color corrections.

The Camera 'Thrill': What Does it Feel Like When the Loaner Has to Go Back?

See my Pentax K1 wish list and Leica SL wish list and Leica M wish list B&H Photo.

I wrote this in an email conversation, almost exactly as it reads below. In part it was to capture my own understanding, in part to explain. The recipient thought it might be interesting perspective for others. So here it is...

Note: I have ample material with the SL and the K1 that will be published in July.

The thrill has left and gone away?

When I borrow, things have to go back. I wish I could afford things like I used to, but I cannot. I can stretch the loaner period slightly, but B&H gets finicky if I do it more than once or twice a year.

So today the Leica SL and Leica 24-90mm f/2.8-4 and M-Adapter-T got onto the UPS truck.

A question I always ask myself when gear goes back is “how does it feel to box it up and see it go?”. A truly subjective query, but telling. So today, I thought about that.

On the Leica SL:
- I felt a sense of relief. It did not bring me any thrills; no "hold" on my psyche saying "damn I wish I could keep it". Quite the contrary.
- My favorite combo with it was with the ZM 35/1.4 — I did like that. But the 35/1.4 works great on the M240, and I have an M240.
- I want an M240 camera with SL or better EVF and a higher res sensor. No useful function is served by the SL for me at this time. Maybe a future body with higher res sensor.
- I can't get past the resolution. I notice it with every SL image; it just doesn't have what Sony or Nikon do even if its pixel quality is very high.

On the Pentax K1:
- I've delayed sending it back. It brings me a thrill. The K1 SuperRes pixel shift mode results vastly outperform any other full frame camera, and handily beat the Leica S IMO (lenses excepted of course).
- I want to keep it. It is very limited in scope (can't have any motion), but when the results are good, nothing can come close.
- the K1 has plenty of operational flaws—particularly with Live View. But oh, it has that image quality thrill. My 4X5 was a hassle too, but chromes were a thrill.
- the lens selection sucks. This really dissuades me for now, and I can wait a bit to see if other vendors might offer pixels shift.

On the Leica Q (a while ago): I would have liked to keep it. But not for $4K.

On the Sony A7R II: less thrill than practical usefulness. My go to camera for outdoors. The SL isn’t even competition in that regard: too big, too heavy, low resolution, no AF lenses at all for what I want. The A7R II solves working problems for me; the SL does not.

None of the above is meant as applying to someone else, only what I do and how I shoot. But even if I were in a studio, that Sony 24-70 and 85/1.4GM are darn fine lenses, and who knows what this year will bring?

Lastly, Leica museumizes its cameras. My M240 has seen essentially zero value add since its release. The EVF in particular is crap. I've asked/cajoled/begged to no avail. Still no My Menu. Same museum piece (meaning its fixed/frozen and just doesn’t change). Sony had a flaw in lossy compression and fixed that. The Batis 18/2.8 rocks, the Sony GM lenses rock, the prospect of a better body in 2016 is very high—moves forward.

Such things are my perspective.

And then there is cost. An $8K 24MP body is not a fault I hold against the SL; it is the best built camera out there. But it is... $8K (more with tax and accessories). A $3K Sony and maybe a better $4K Sony this fall is still less money, and I get great ROI there. So on the business side it's no contest also.

What Leica has done is a terrific move forward. Kudos to them. Now maybe there will be an M360 and that will be the camera for me. But at $8K, it’s gonna be tough all over again.

ThunderBay 4 - The Speed To Create. The Capacity To Dream.

Leitax Conversion Kits for Nikon Lenses to Pentax K Mount Now Shipping

See my Pentax K1 wish list at B&H Photo.

Leitax Nikon / Zeiss ZF.2 to Pentax K conversion kit

The Pentax K1 in SuperRes pixel shift mode offer the best image quality on the market today (for the 35mm format) and beats many if not most medium format offerings. It’s that simple.

But the Pentax lens line is at best mediocre, the biggest thing holding the K1 back from high performance, something I observed firsthand in the field using the Zeiss ZK 28mm f/2 Distagon, whose performance I found quite satisying.

Now, Leitax is shipping Nikon and Zeiss ZF to Pentax K conversion kits. Nikon F-mount lenses with an aperture ring can be converted to Pentax K mount and this conversion is reversible. In particular, my favored Zeiss ZF.2 lenses (Nikon F mount) can be converted to Pentax K mount. Leitax will also convert your lens for you for 75 Euro (plus the cost of the kit and shipping).

See the Leitax step-by-step conversion process page.

David Lladó of Leitax writes:

Writing to warn you that the Leitax mount cannot be installed on all the Nikkor lenses with aperture ring. Only on those without CPU and that allow to remove the original mount clean, without any attached mechanism. I will show it in the instructions for Nikkor lenses soon.

The Zeiss ZF.2 lenses have CPU, but have the chip attached to the mount, and it goes off together with the mount, so no problem with ZF.2 lenses. But the CPU Nikkor lenses have a flat cable going inside the lens that connects the contact strip at the mount with the chip, autofocus motors and data sensors inside the lens.

DIGLLOYD: all Zeiss ZF.2 lenses contain a CPU chip. The original ZF lenses do not.

See also:

OWC Easy SSD Upgrade Guide for MacBook Pro/Air/Retina, iMac, Mac Pro, MacMini, more!

Leica SL vs M240: Lens Corrections and Color Rendering with M Lenses

See my Leica SL wish list and Leica M wish list at B&H Photo.

This page looks at issues with the Leica SL and Leica M240 using Leica M lenses ( Leica M-Adapter-T required for M lenses on the SL):

  • With equivalent conversions (white balance and tint), color rendition of the Leica SL vs Leica M240 is shown. The results here were seen to be general results applying to all M lenses and are not specific to the lens used here (18mm f/3.8 SEM).
  • The Leica SL DNG files from M lenses have lens corrections enforced by Adobe Camera Raw (no option to disable). This changes the field of view and degrades sharpness.
  • Adobe Camera Raw has a “double correction” bug in which it is possible to enable lens corrections twice, resulting in a an erroneous output file. This bug has been reported to Adobe.
  • Images with and without distortion correction.

These behaviors are worth understanding if the intent is to shoot M lenses, and one is choosing a camera body as a platform. That high-res EVF of the SL is very nice for focusing, but the benefits may stop there.

Leica SL vs M240: Lens Corrections and Color Rendering with M Lenses

__METADATA__

David W writes:

That was an interesting post regarding the white balance issues on the Leica SL. You may remember publishing an email I sent to you regarding the use of the A7RM2 in very cold conditions. At that time I mentioned difficulties with setting the white balance and I think that it was not seen as a problem. Well in the end after a lot of fiddling with exposure, temperature and tint I got to where I wanted to go but I still maintain that the “out-of-the-box” render had a blue cast that was difficult to correct. Following that exercise I have had a similar problem (as have many others) with a recent upgrade from CCD to CMOS on my Hasselblad. [DIGLLOYD: sometimes a channel blows out even though the histogram won’t show it; use RawDigger to check the actual raw data. I can’t rule out behavior in cold, but my cold weather experience has been fine].

I have come to the view that when a camera manufacturer is bringing a new model to market it arrives with an under-developed or thought-through firmware setup. More importantly the algorithm that presents the raw image to the raw converter seems to be a source of some of the problems. My understanding is that the sensor simply outputs data as a luminance measure per cell and that the embedded software interprets that according to the Bayer matrix and then the raw software converts to a visible image. However that takes no account of the way these sensor cells respond to light of different wavelengths until someone can take some measurements and establish a profile. Who decides what is good and what is bad? Is it colour fidelity or is it a match for the earlier version of sensor (CCD or otherwise). We then have the further interpretations of the raw converter but by that time we as photographers do have some control.

The chief complaint I hear from many people and one that I have experienced is simply that the output is different when compared with what they used to get and as a result new practices have to be learned to achieve the result envisaged - as you appear to have discovered with the SL.

What I do not understand is why the camera manufacturer cannot simply replicate the output qualities and colour values for the sensors predecessor as an optional profile? I may be completely naive here or have a fundamental misunderstanding of the technology but if so it is a position shared with many others who buy and then upgrade a camera because they like the way the images look in terms of colour, sharpness and so on.

BTW you have an opinion of merit on most issues and you are not bland or boring. It makes entertaining and informative reading.

DIGLLOYD: the choice of sensor definitely changes the look of the image. For starters, the CFA (color filter array) on the sensor may be different for each sensor, filtering light a bit differently for red, green, blue (and with overlap), and the sensor itself may respond a bit differently to the light it receives. There may be other spectral cutoffs as well suvh sd more or less IR blocking, more or less magenta/cyan overall tint; all of these things mean that the recorded data will vary by sensor. Add in changes to dynamic range and noise behavior and the output is just never going to match. A really superior profile could address some of this, but vendors never seem to bother.

In a similar vein, the difference in color between my workhorse NEC PA302W display and the NEC PA322UHD as for neutral gray is visibly different—even though calibration claims perfect neutrality for both (it has to do with the nature of the backlighting and non-continuous spectrum of that backlighting)—the PA302W rules the roost. Displays do not use continuous spectrum, and sensors use color filter arrays. No perfect match is going to happen. That is the source of the issue. Add in the raw converter, and all bets are off, except that companies like PhaseOne and others in the medium format area tend to try to minimize the differences between cameras.

Add in light with a strong color cast, and any filtration issues can be accentuated outside relatively narrow zone of “daylight”, which I would roughly label as 4600°K to 7000°K. Outside those bounds are warm sunsets and high mountain bluish light and any filtration subtleties start popping up like mushrooms in terms of sensor behavior. Not to forget the lens behavior either, which can attenuate some spectra and/or flare more. As a strong example for sensor non linearity, the Sigma DP Merrill has weirdly color reaction in bluish light, which is a challenge in processing raw.

As for the look of the SL sensor: based first and foremost on field shots but confirmed with the above color checker series, I rate its color and contrast as inferior to the M240 using equivalent processing settings (equivalent white balance and tint for neutrality as per above, but not adding contrast or saturation). The SL looks dull and flat by comparison to the M240, that is, with M lenses. Quite possibly the SL may be more accurate, and it definitely has better dynamic range and noise but I would say this: accurate is not the same as pleasing/appealing. The SL is less pleasing to my eyes than the M240 and the M240 in turn was less pleasing than the CCD-sensor M9.

Our trusted photo rental store

Evaluating White Balance and Tint for Leica SL and Leica M240 with DataColor SpyderCHECKR with 3 Lenses

See my Leica SL wish list and Leica M wish list at B&H Photo.

This analysis should be of keen interest to any Leica SL shooter, or anyone considering the SL as a replacement for the M240. Or, simply to understand how the choice of camera profile drives very different settings for white balance and tint.

Leica SL vs M240: White Balance and Tint with Adobe Camera Raw, Sunlight

White balance and tint were giving me fits with field shots with the SL; the Leica SL delivered many greenish and bluish images in the mountains at its “Daylight” setting.. To process those images for good color rendering, it was necessary to establish a reference color temperature and tint for the Leica SL in sunlight. For comparisons, it was also necessary to do the same for the Leica M240, and to use several different lenses as cross checks.

Accordingly, the Datacolor SpyderCHECKR was used here in overhead mid-day solstice sunlight to to determine the appropriate white balance and tint settings for raw conversion in sunlight.

Three lenses on two cameras were used to establish whether the white balance and tint behavior is consistent. The Leica SL and Leica M240 were used as follows:

David W writes:

That was an interesting post regarding the white balance issues on the Leica SL. You may remember publishing an email I sent to you regarding the use of the A7RM2 in very cold conditions. At that time I mentioned difficulties with setting the white balance and I think that it was not seen as a problem. Well in the end after a lot of fiddling with exposure, temperature and tint I got to where I wanted to go but I still maintain that the “out-of-the-box” render had a blue cast that was difficult to correct. Following that exercise I have had a similar problem (as have many others) with a recent upgrade from CCD to CMOS on my Hasselblad. [DIGLLOYD: sometimes a channel blows out even though the histogram won’t show it; use RawDigger to check the actual raw data. I can’t rule out behavior in cold, but my cold weather experience has been fine].

I have come to the view that when a camera manufacturer is bringing a new model to market it arrives with an under-developed or thought-through firmware setup. More importantly the algorithm that presents the raw image to the raw converter seems to be a source of some of the problems. My understanding is that the sensor simply outputs data as a luminance measure per cell and that the embedded software interprets that according to the Bayer matrix and then the raw software converts to a visible image. However that takes no account of the way these sensor cells respond to light of different wavelengths until someone can take some measurements and establish a profile. Who decides what is good and what is bad? Is it colour fidelity or is it a match for the earlier version of sensor (CCD or otherwise). We then have the further interpretations of the raw converter but by that time we as photographers do have some control.

The chief complaint I hear from many people and one that I have experienced is simply that the output is different when compared with what they used to get and as a result new practices have to be learned to achieve the result envisaged - as you appear to have discovered with the SL.

What I do not understand is why the camera manufacturer cannot simply replicate the output qualities and colour values for the sensors predecessor as an optional profile? I may be completely naive here or have a fundamental misunderstanding of the technology but if so it is a position shared with many others who buy and then upgrade a camera because they like the way the images look in terms of colour, sharpness and so on.

BTW you have an opinion of merit on most issues and you are not bland or boring. It makes entertaining and informative reading.

DIGLLOYD: the choice of sensor definitely changes the look of the image. For starters, the CFA (color filter array) on the sensor may be different for each sensor, filtering light a bit differently for red, green, blue (and with overlap), and the sensor itself may respond a bit differently to the light it receives. There may be other spectral cutoffs as well suvh sd more or less IR blocking, more or less magenta/cyan overall tint; all of these things mean that the recorded data will vary by sensor. Add in changes to dynamic range and noise behavior and the output is just never going to match. A really superior profile could address some of this, but vendors never seem to bother.

In a similar vein, the difference in color between my workhorse NEC PA302W display and the NEC PA322UHD as for neutral gray is visibly different—even though calibration claims perfect neutrality for both (it has to do with the nature of the backlighting and non-continuous spectrum of that backlighting)—the PA302W rules the roost. Displays do not use continuous spectrum, and sensors use color filter arrays. No perfect match is going to happen. That is the source of the issue. Add in the raw converter, and all bets are off, except that companies like PhaseOne and others in the medium format area tend to try to minimize the differences between cameras.

Add in light with a strong color cast, and any filtration issues can be accentuated outside relatively narrow zone of “daylight”, which I would roughly label as 4600°K to 7000°K. Outside those bounds are warm sunsets and high mountain bluish light and any filtration subtleties start popping up like mushrooms in terms of sensor behavior. Not to forget the lens behavior either, which can attenuate some spectra and/or flare more. As a strong example for sensor non linearity, the Sigma DP Merrill has weirdly color reaction in bluish light, which is a challenge in processing raw.

As for the look of the SL sensor: based first and foremost on field shots but confirmed with the above color checker series, I rate its color and contrast as inferior to the M240 using equivalent processing settings (equivalent white balance and tint for neutrality as per above, but not adding contrast or saturation). The SL looks dull and flat by comparison to the M240, that is, with M lenses. Quite possibly the SL may be more accurate, and it definitely has better dynamic range and noise but I would say this: accurate is not the same as pleasing/appealing. The SL is less pleasing to my eyes than the M240 and the M240 in turn was less pleasing than the CCD-sensor M9.

MacPerformanceGuide.com

TIP: How to Force the use of DNG sidecar files with Adobe Camera Raw

See my Leica SL wish list and Leica M wish list at B&H Photo.

Modification of orginal RAW files is in my view a risky game: files can be potentially be damaged, modified files are very large and have to be backed-up in their entirety, original shooting settings in the DNG are masked or overwritten. Basically, I prefer to think of my RAW files as original negatives/slides; I do not want them modified—ever. This has implications for forensics and law enforcement as well. Originals should be unaltered originals.

Unfortunately, at least in Photoshop, Adobe Camera Raw does not respect its own sidecar preferences: opening a DNG file modifies the file, writing/overwriting internal data as well as changing the file modification date. Each to his own, but I find this very annoying for backup, sorting by date, etc.

Adobe Camera Raw Preferences for DNG sidecar files

Solution: lock DNG files

The lockDNG and unlockDNG scripts are trivial. They lock or unlock all DNG files in the current directory, using the command line in Terminal. I save them as executable scripts in my PATH.

#!/bin/sh
# lockDNG ©2016 DIGLLOYD INC
# LOCK all DNG files in current directory, recursively
find . -name "*.DNG" -exec chflags -v uchg {} \;

#!/bin/sh
# unlockDNG ©2016 DIGLLOYD INC
# UNLOCK all DNG files in current directory, recursively
find . -name "*.DNG" -exec chflags -v nouchg {} \;

Using the lockDNG and unlockDNG commands is simple:

# type 'cd ' then drag desired folder into Terminal window. Example:
diglloydMP:DIGLLOYD lloyd$ cd /Volumes/Archive/2016-0606-TripPhotos 
diglloydMP:2016-0606-TripPhotos lloyd$ lockDNG
./LeicaSL/2016-0606-LeicaM240-WhiteMountains/L1000602.DNG
./LeicaSL/2016-0606-LeicaM240-WhiteMountains/L1000603.DNG
./LeicaSL/2016-0606-LeicaM240-WhiteMountains/L1000604.DNG
...

# Unlock DNG files diglloydMP:2016-0606-TripPhotos lloyd$ unlockDNG
./LeicaSL/2016-0606-LeicaM240-WhiteMountains/L1000597.DNG
./LeicaSL/2016-0606-LeicaM240-WhiteMountains/L1000599.DNG
./LeicaSL/2016-0606-LeicaM240-WhiteMountains/L1000600.DNG
...

When a DNG file is locked, this forces ACR to use sidecar files. It has some hassle factor: reorganizing/moving DNG files requires unlocking them. The OS X Finder shows lock icons once locked.

Locked DNG files: forces Adobe Camera Raw to use sidecar files

TIP for Leica SL: How to Fix Poor DNG Zoomed-in Quality

See my Leica SL wish list and Leica M wish list at B&H Photo.

Normally I shoot raw only (no JPEG). While out shooting the Leica SL in the field on my recent trip, I noticed that when I zoomed in fully to check sharpness, the zoomed in image quality with DNG was awful, with mangled detail and mottled color smearing. The degradation varies by image, with some images looking ~OK and some looking truly awful.

I knew from past experience with other cameras that setting the camera to RAW+JPEG would yield a far superior zoomed-in image.

Setting the Leica SL to DNG+JPEG highest quality results in a zoomed-in experience with far superior image quality.

As a bonus, DNG+JPEG also yields a superior histogram; the DNG-only histogram can be notched and coarse, but with DNG+JPEG the histogram has smooth countours (again, not always but definitely bad with some images).

Later, I just throw away the JPEG files. That this crudely wasteful kludge is required is absurd, but it’s very helpful when reviewing focus/sharpness in the field.

Which Camera System / Lenses Should I Get?
✓ Get the best system for your needs the first time: diglloyd photographic consulting.
Our trusted photo rental store

diglloyd Inc. | FTC Disclosure | PRIVACY POLICY | Trademarks | Terms of Use
Contact | About Lloyd Chambers | Consulting | Photo Tours
RSS Feeds | Twitter
Copyright © 2008-2016 diglloyd Inc, all rights reserved.