Panasonic S1R lens support

Having just swapped platforms to Panasonic, and a long-standing proponent and user of PL, I was disappointed to see such meagre support for the S1R. In particular, key non-Panasonic lenses like the Sigma 14-24mm, 35mm f1.2 and 100-400mm are missing, although these are present for the S5. It’s also crucial to have modules for the Panasonic f1.8 primes.
Are these in the pipeline? The L-mount alliance’s growing commitment bodes well for the future of L-mount but its primary workhorse body is currently weakly supported. I have also posted these suggestions on the relevant webpage.
In the meantime, is there a way of forcing the S5 module of (for instance) the Sigma 35mm f1.2 onto an S1R RAW file?

SIGMA 100-400 DG DN OS is also missing for the S5, it may be the same for the other lenses you mention. Not sure if PL really works the way you are explaining it, I used to think that once a lens is available for one camera model it is available for all - unless the camera itself is not yet supported or they have a different lens mount and thus cannot be combined.

You can also check this: Lens support - Sigma 100-400mm DG DN (Sony e-mount) - #5 by Marie (the comment should refer both to E- and L-mount - just scroll up a bit).

Hmm, are you sure? 100-400, yes, clearly missing, but 14-24 and 35/1.2 are available for both cameras.

But what I find a bit weird: I have these and a couple of other lenses and PL was asking “would you like to download the module” and of course, I let PL download: But when I go into module administration, the already downloaded modules are offered for download.

Nonetheless, the gaps in the line-up of DxO are huge. In the meantime I just use Capture One as they are using the inbuilt lens-profiles (which I guess is the better way anyway). I was hoping to be able to skip Capture One, but although some features of PL are nice, the whole package falls short, especially considering the extra costs for FilmPack and ViewPoint.

just a side note
I believe it’s folder sensitive. → When to delete a certain profile you have to make sure, there is no pic from the so far used lens in that folder …

“Folder sensitive”? A lens is a lens and a profile for that lens should be stored in the database. You might be right, but if so, PL is even more cumbersome.

Thanks for that screenshot: I need to install my upgrade and see what else is available. I’ve been taking my information from the supported combinations webpage, which seems not to be up to date.

When a module isn’t available for a particular lens/body combo, is PL as crippled as it seems? I get good results at high ISO using PL’s noise correction when a module is present, but when a lens isn’t recognised, it seems the user is thrown completely out on their own.

It’s simple to make a user profile for geometry, vignetting and offset sharpening, but it doesn’t seem possible to replicate the cunning wizardry of PL’s noise reduction using the tools available. If you use the ‘wrong’ lens, you seem stuck with lousy noise reduction, which is known to PL for your sensor when using a different lens. Or have I misunderstood something critical?

In the case of the Sigma 100-400mm I see you are right. Surely, though, profiling a lens for projection onto FF is the major part of building a module?
I’ve been using DXO for more than a decade but have never known a situation where the majority of my lenses are unsupported like this.

Welcome in the club, Mark :grinning:

DxO always claims intensive testing of new lenses, but honestly, which company could keep up with the pace new lenses are released? Also, their combinations are valid for a certain lens/body combo, but what happens when a new body is released? endless story, I believe. Capture One doesn’t brag so much about “individually optimized lens profiles”, but all profiles stored by the manufacturer in the lens’ firmware is read out. I think their concept is a bit more pragmatic and replies to lens manufacturers which develop partly “flawed” (distortion is a flaw, no?) lenses to correct their flaws - why should a software company deliver these profiles? That’s the responsibility of the guys who saved a couple of bucks for the lens’ benefit.

I went away from Nikon for several reasons, started with Lumix and oops – not supported by C1 (that was one year ago). So I gave DxO a try, but here as well - too many reasons for stopping using it, and meanwhile C1 found this weird Panasonic brand and is supporting all lenses (with inbuilt lens-profiles), all bodies I so far tried. Plus at least having a little DAM whereas DxO PL just sucks.

1 Like

Yep, if you haven’t installed ViewPoint, I believe, there’s not much manual edit a PL-only user can do. But that might be wrong – however, I also bought VP as it has some nice features C1 doesn’t have.