Well its a pity to know support are no better informed than us about what gets fixed. I have been asked if this has been fixed, I regrettably had to report back nothing done at all has been done.
But should we be suprised when back “Back in 2020 Marie said this will be raised with Captain PO” the long grass beckoned as with most things!
all that reading / using exif information is grossly crippled… for example Canon CR3 raw files - DxO PL6 does read focusing distance from those raw files ( there are 2 tags btw 0x0014 FocusDistanceUpper and 0x0015 FocusDistanceLower ), but if you create a DNG using Adobe tools then Adobe translates all that focusing info into XMP:ApproximateFocusDistance ( one tag ) and then DxO PL6 is too proud to use that ( I do not believe that they do not know that it is exists - so it is a matter of ego on DxO side ) … so you going to Sony ARW situation… that is you have to do manual correction for each raw file ( or being a clever dude you run exiftool and add those tags from CR3 to DNG and then DxO PL6 starts behave ) …
so what you need to do is
generate .DOP files for your .ARW raw files
run a batch script using exiftool to get something like a value of “FocusDistance2” tag from each .ARW and
correct .DOP files to have
Overrides = {
DistortionFocus = <value obtained from “FocusDistance2” tag>,
}
PS: or just modify the existing line DistortionFocus = 128 to be DistortionFocus = <value obtained from “FocusDistance2” tag>
PS2: make sure that DxO PL6 database does not interfere w/ your .DOP manipulations - in my case as I do not use it at all - I delete it each time I start PL6 ( before starting PL6 - I have a script that runs it from FRV )
here is a command file for windows for .arw raw files in a current directory, assuming you generated all .DOP files ( do back your .DOPs just in case )
for %%f in (*.arw) do call :work %%f
goto :EOF
:work
FOR /F “tokens=*” %%v IN (‘exiftool -b -FocusDistance2 %1’ ) do ( SET VAR=%%v )
powershell -Command “(gc %1.dop) -replace ‘DistortionFocus = 128’, ‘DistortionFocus = %VAR%’ | Out-File -encoding ASCII %1.dop”
goto :EOF
Thank you for your helpful reply’s and the work in coming up with a work round. I will give it a go when I have more time, grandchildren coming for a few days and the joys of getting ready and with the ever plentiful medical appointments clutter the next few days but then I hope to try it. Again thanks.
…which is normal. Please check this out:
Probably doing some thing wrong but didn’t work. Copied exiftool to windows and ran command file and it apeared to wok but no change, no distance there. Deleted PL database befor running on a test folder and after befor running the command file. It been many years since doing anthing like this.
Checked with another ILCE-6400 file from preview.com and found that it does not read distance either. Testing this, I found the following
With my 90mm macro lense as you move the slider ther is a lot of correction but no idea if the
right correction.
That one is bad clearly somthing wrong with the lense modual and the distortion is all over the place, some of my ones change a lot as you move the slider on the diffrent lenses but nothing like that! exiftool gives it a distance of 1.365m.
I’ve seen this too. Considering that the capture was rather taken from a short distance, there might be a possibility of a false entry, be it due accidental or systematic errors.
it is working on my side (with my A7R2)… once you have .DOP files generated quit PL6 run the script (you can open DOP files in any plain text editor and see if the change is in there), delete DxO database, start PL6… what is your Sony camera model so that I can download raw files from dpreview and test it myself
DxO just like anybody else is offering crude optics corrections that is you have just few sets of parameters corresponding to few limited focusing distance ranges… apparently the assumption is that practically no optics needs different set of corrections past that focusing distance (128m = infinity in DxO opinion), so when theY (DxO) can’t get ( don’t want in case of .ARW, can’t in case or .RAF, etc ) focusing distance from a raw file they put 128m in DOP file … and it seems that in real life DxO does not supply any different optics correction parameters past something well below 128m ( can be like 20m-infinity, or 40m-infinity, etc )
A6400 and a6000
see my notes in the other topic about the raws from those 2 cameras
I downloaded A6400 raw files from dpreview and everything is working , except indeed for some camera + lenses combos DxO PL6 does not show “Focusing Distance” tool ( for example A6400 + Sigma 30/1.4 “Focusing Distance” tool is shown – but for Zony E24/1.8 or for FE24/1.4 GM it is not - DxO modules exist for all lenses in this example )
But the script does correctly fixes DOP files and for combos where the tool is shown you will see the updated correct focusing distance when you open DxO PL6 again in “Focusing Distance” tool
I suggest you file a case with DxO PL6 to fix the matter
Sorry not working for me errers
t line:7 char:4
, ParentContainsErrorRecordExceptionThis has been going on since 2020 I have found when DXO cut the distance reading without telling Sony lens users. Though from what you have found what distance they were reading before is unknown.
In this it emerged “Focusing distance is in ‘Focus Distance 2’ entry (which is a calculation, not a real tag) but we don’t use it for now on this camera.
When we will use it we will announce it.”
At that stage V3 still read distance but they changed modules latter and V3 lost distance as well thereafter.
Then there was thread I started
and contribution’s made it clear as with the earlier thread there was a wide range of problem Sony cameras and lenses.
In here Marie admitted “we don’t read focus for all Sony A, we have some retrofit to do for A7 of generation I, II and III.
We haven’t done it yet because it require to modify DxO Optic modules as well and everything is a bandwidth question.”
It was this thread you join at but clearly it’s a known issue that DXO are ignoring (as I fear they do with too many problems). Since this thread was started they have effectively withdrawn all real interaction with users via the forum. Support appears to be no more knowledgeable than us as to what’s going on. They asked me if the distance issue had been resolved and just passed it back to the developers again. I fear the people who make the effective decisions in DXO have fully removed themselves from the users which again I fear could create problems for the products. But the distance issue for CR3 and Sony A is an example of this refusal to deal with old isues but add new marketing layers, the old Corel Draw strategy.
Tested a few files written by a Canon EOS M6 using the (old) Canon EF 100mm Macro lens and found, that these files had FocusDistance tag values with 1cm (0.01m) precision, at close-up and macro distances.
As far as I’ve tested, distance entries do depend on body/lens combination and more.
Let’s consider a zoom lens. It should also report focal length in addition to distance. I did not expect the values to be precise to 0.01, but rather to show ranges instead…and I also found individual files that had no entry for FL, even though other files of a series of photos taken with the same body and lens had. Welcome to the metadata desert of the real!
the formula to calculate ‘Focus Distance 2’ from a “real” tag ‘Focus Position 2’ and focal length and sensor format was / is known, so that was a lame excuse !