Announcement

Collapse

December's CHALLENGE

The topic to inspire your creative juices this month is BOXES Please don't forget to vote on November's LEAVES challenge and please re-vote if you already did but before the recent forum upgrade.

See more
See less

E600 vs. E620 RAW files

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

    Originally posted by PeterBirder View Post
    Hi Tord.
    I have been trying to find a way to get DXO Optics Pro to accept E-600 files for ages and it's driven me mad.

    I asked DXO and got no answer.


    Regards
    Hi,

    I got a reply from DXO within next working day where they explained politely that they will not add a camera body if there is no business case (I fully understand that).

    I provided the technical information back to them and asked them to reconsider their decision, or at a minimum to publish E600 support as an application note or "not officially supported feature". Let's see what they answer.

    /Tord

    My Gallery on 500px

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

      Originally posted by Tordan58 View Post
      Hi,

      I got a reply from DXO within next working day where they explained politely that they will not add a camera body if there is no business case (I fully understand that).

      I provided the technical information back to them and asked them to reconsider their decision, or at a minimum to publish E600 support as an application note or "not officially supported feature". Let's see what they answer.

      /Tord
      Glad you managed to at least get a reply from DXO Tord. I will be interested to hear their reaction to your suggestion.
      Pleased to hear that you have managed to find a way to modify the files that works.

      Many thanks.
      Peter

      she looked at me and said "It's official. I hate your camera. It's just so amazing and perfect I want one!"

      E-M10 MK II, E-M5, E-PL1, E-PM2, mZ 12-50, mZ 14-42mm EZ, mZ 17mm f 1.8, mZ 25mm f1.8, mZ 45mm f1.8, mZ 75-300mm II.
      OM1n, OM 50mm f1.8.
      Oly Viewer3, Dxo Pro 11. FastStone.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

        Hi Peter,

        Actually I have an open support case regarding my issue and I get a level of attention on it that exceeds my expectations.

        For good reasons DXO are hesitant in supporting a camera that has no sound business case, adding support for E-600 would require a new release of DXO SW since camera support is realized in the main SW and not in the add-on modules.

        What worries me is that they seem not to be convinced that the E-600 is the same camera as E-620, the support engineer I am discussing with had a few valid points regarding this. Furthermore they said that Olympus "does not even admit to the existance of the E-600". Could it be that Olympus pushed the camera to the market and then changed their mind, as a consequence of withdrawing from the DSLR market except for the E5?

        Anyway, I was offered to submit E600 ORFs samples (I suppose that DXO don't have access to any) so that their engineers could inspect them to see if what is really involved. If it ends up in E-600 support in a future SW release is another story...

        /Tord

        My Gallery on 500px

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

          Hi Tord.
          Thanks for that update,I'm pleased that you are able to at least discuss the problem with a DXO support engineer. If they are at least looking at our problem there is some possibility of a solution.

          The E-600 seems to have been another of Olympus' strange marketing strategies but I guess we should be used to that now.

          Regards
          Peter

          she looked at me and said "It's official. I hate your camera. It's just so amazing and perfect I want one!"

          E-M10 MK II, E-M5, E-PL1, E-PM2, mZ 12-50, mZ 14-42mm EZ, mZ 17mm f 1.8, mZ 25mm f1.8, mZ 45mm f1.8, mZ 75-300mm II.
          OM1n, OM 50mm f1.8.
          Oly Viewer3, Dxo Pro 11. FastStone.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

            Peter,

            If Olympus will not provide support for E600 I am considering writing a piece of SW that patches the ORFs in a batch.

            /Tord

            My Gallery on 500px

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

              Hi Peter (and other E-600 users for that matter)

              I have written a step-by step description how to proceed to have E-600 ORF files manifest themselves as E-620 so that they can be processed by third-party SW e.d. DXO Optics Pro.

              The description is available here.

              Hope some of you will find it useful.


              Originally posted by PeterBirder View Post
              Hi Tord.
              Thanks for that update,I'm pleased that you are able to at least discuss the problem with a DXO support engineer. If they are at least looking at our problem there is some possibility of a solution.
              I have had a very constructive dialog with DXO technical support and have managed to convince them that E-600 and E-620 are essentially one and same camera and they will file a Feature Request to the engineering team, meaning there is at least a chance we will see E-600 supported in an upcoming release.

              Originally posted by PeterBirder View Post
              A member called MOLGRIPS who just made 8 posts in April/May said he had found a solution. In his last post said he was going to write a Utility to implement this and post it but since then he has disappeared.
              He found however that as well as changing E-600 to E-620 in the EXIF you need to change the code in the Maker Notes against "Camera Type 2" from S0030 to S0032.
              On this subject I would like to deny this is needed, nor fully true. ORFs created with my E-620 have a different "Camera Type 2" value than S0032.

              When patching the files I changed one character only (E-600 to become E-620) and did not bother about the "Camera Type 2"



              /Tord

              My Gallery on 500px

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                Hi,

                This is the latest on this topic.

                DxO's Imaging Team has agreed to take a serious look at the E-600/E-620 equivalence. If this checks out to their satisfaction, then a version of DxO Optics Pro with explicit E-600 support will likely be released. Best timing estimate is "during 2012".

                Regardless of the outcome, I must say that the level of support and interest for my case exceeds my expectations.

                /Tord

                My Gallery on 500px

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                  Hi Tord.
                  Thanks very much for your last two posts.

                  Due to your hard work and willingness to share the results I can now at last process my E-600 files in DXO Optics pro and there seems to be a reasonable chance that DXO will upgrade the program.

                  You are a gentleman sir.
                  Many thanks.
                  Peter

                  she looked at me and said "It's official. I hate your camera. It's just so amazing and perfect I want one!"

                  E-M10 MK II, E-M5, E-PL1, E-PM2, mZ 12-50, mZ 14-42mm EZ, mZ 17mm f 1.8, mZ 25mm f1.8, mZ 45mm f1.8, mZ 75-300mm II.
                  OM1n, OM 50mm f1.8.
                  Oly Viewer3, Dxo Pro 11. FastStone.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                    Just for the record, I use ExifToolGUI to edit my E-600 ORF files and it works a treat.
                    I just change E-600 to E-620 and my old copy of Adobe Photoshop Elements 7 will then open them fine.

                    I'd certainly be interested in some sort of batch solution if anyone manages it but I would have thought ExifTool (the CLI version without the GUI) would be a good starting point.

                    High jacking the thread slightly, has anyone found a way to fudge the Exif data to impersonate a similar spec PEN model or even another E-series model? It'd be nice to be able to access the extra PEN Art Filters or even the E-5 filters in Olympus Viewer 2. I did have a play around earlier in the year, including changing the Camera Type 2 field but didn't get anywhere... perhaps I need someone to send me some PEN/E-5 ORFs so I can compare them to the E-600s?
                    E-600, E-500, E-330, Zuiko 14-42mm(Mk1 & Mk2), Zuiko 40-150mm, Zuiko 18-180mm, Zuiko 35mm Macro, loads of Rollei/Voigtlander QBM, Praktica PB, M42, Exakta and OM-fit legacy glass
                    My Flickr

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                      Originally posted by Lord Minty View Post
                      Just for the record, I use ExifToolGUI to edit my E-600 ORF files and it works a treat.
                      I just change E-600 to E-620 and my old copy of Adobe Photoshop Elements 7 will then open them fine.

                      I'd certainly be interested in some sort of batch solution if anyone manages it but I would have thought ExifTool (the CLI version without the GUI) would be a good starting point.
                      You can do it in batch mode in ExifToolGui - just highlight all the files you want to edit, then change the camera to E-620 and it'll change all of them. I did this with my E-600 files and it worked fine for Elements - but not DXO
                      Paul

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                        I too use exiftoolgui and was about to add the comments above..
                        E-600

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                          Originally posted by meach View Post
                          You can do it in batch mode in ExifToolGui - just highlight all the files you want to edit, then change the camera to E-620 and it'll change all of them. I did this with my E-600 files and it worked fine for Elements - but not DXO
                          Ah right, I'll have to remember that. Generally I seem to just do one file at a time anyway as I'm usually a SOOC photographer.
                          I've got a copy of DXO Optics (v5 or v5.5 I think) and Film Pack sitting in a box unused - I've not installed them as they use Pace Interlok/iLok which is to say the least a dubious piece of software.
                          E-600, E-500, E-330, Zuiko 14-42mm(Mk1 & Mk2), Zuiko 40-150mm, Zuiko 18-180mm, Zuiko 35mm Macro, loads of Rollei/Voigtlander QBM, Praktica PB, M42, Exakta and OM-fit legacy glass
                          My Flickr

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                            Well I've finally given in and installed DXO Optics Pro 5 and Film Pack v1 on my old Windows XP laptop.

                            I've taken a sample .ORF RAW from my E-600 and if I just change the model name in ExifToolGUI to E-620 then DXO says the image has "no recognized color data", and the same happens even if I change the MakerNotes CameraType2 from S0030 to S0032.

                            So I tried Tordan58's technique on a fresh copy of the file, using the Hex editor and I still get the same error... I'm confused!

                            I think I'm goign to have to do a bit more playing
                            E-600, E-500, E-330, Zuiko 14-42mm(Mk1 & Mk2), Zuiko 40-150mm, Zuiko 18-180mm, Zuiko 35mm Macro, loads of Rollei/Voigtlander QBM, Praktica PB, M42, Exakta and OM-fit legacy glass
                            My Flickr

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                              Well I've finally given in and installed DXO Optics Pro 5 and Film Pack v1 on my old Windows XP laptop.

                              I've taken a sample .ORF RAW from my E-600 and if I just change the model name in ExifToolGUI to E-620 then DXO says the image has "no recognized color data", and the same happens even if I change the MakerNotes CameraType2 from S0030 to S0032.

                              So I tried Tordan58's technique on a fresh copy of the file, using the Hex editor and I still get the same error... I'm confused!

                              I think I'm goign to have to do a bit more playing
                              E-600, E-500, E-330, Zuiko 14-42mm(Mk1 & Mk2), Zuiko 40-150mm, Zuiko 18-180mm, Zuiko 35mm Macro, loads of Rollei/Voigtlander QBM, Praktica PB, M42, Exakta and OM-fit legacy glass
                              My Flickr

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: E600 vs. E620 RAW files

                                Originally posted by Lord Minty View Post
                                So I tried Tordan58's technique on a fresh copy of the file, using the Hex editor and I still get the same error... I'm confused!
                                I suspect Optics Pro 5 will not support any of the later Oly cameras. Dxo have recently issued Optics Pro 7 and Tord's technique works fine for me for both 6 and 7. Dxo currently have a free download trial of a fully functional Optics Pro 7 which will work for a month.

                                Regards.
                                Peter

                                she looked at me and said "It's official. I hate your camera. It's just so amazing and perfect I want one!"

                                E-M10 MK II, E-M5, E-PL1, E-PM2, mZ 12-50, mZ 14-42mm EZ, mZ 17mm f 1.8, mZ 25mm f1.8, mZ 45mm f1.8, mZ 75-300mm II.
                                OM1n, OM 50mm f1.8.
                                Oly Viewer3, Dxo Pro 11. FastStone.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X