OK, after fruitless contact with support I have no alternative but to post this here. Whenever I work on a picture taken with my Batis 85 f 1.8, Photolab says I have to download modules for Sony 85 f1.8 and Tamron 85 f1.8 (and I have the Batis module). This is obviously a bug. I checked the latest version and no solution yet. The story of my interaction with support goes as follows:
- First report December 2017
- Support asked for pictures: given
- No further replies after my asking several times.
- Long period of nothing further because at that time I only had the Batis on loan. Acquired it almost a year later.
- October 25 (2018)as the problem was still there re-reported the problem referring to my previous report.
- October 28 Reply from support that they could not find the previous report.
- October 29 support asks for a full description of the Batis 85 !!! Quite ridiculous that a user should have to give that to them of course but I sent it anyway. How did they make the module?
- November 8 support asks if I am working with RAW files: answered in the affirmative.
- November 15 support asks if I have already upgraded to PL2: answered in the affirmative.
- December 18 Apology from support that it is taking so long … and the following questions: “Are you trying to find out why it is offering other modules? Or is not finding the correct module for your image?”
After that I decided to give up and told them not to bother anymore.
DxO: this is no way to handle your business!
In regard to the lens profile I believe that Tamron is the one holding the patent for the optical design of that 85mm/1.8 and the Batis is built on the same.
So it’s one profile covering multiple manufacturers lenses.
When it comes to DxO customer dialogue I’ll leave that for DxO to comment.
With all due respect Required, that would then be a unique case that I have never heard of before. Does anyone else know of a case where several modules are needed for one lens because of patent issues? And what is the Sony 85 doing there then?
As these three lenses are basically the same lens and based on the same optical formula I believe that is one of the causes this bug have occurred. And perhaps that’s why the support is so confused.
Just some ideas, what happen if you manually download all three profiles?
Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 (cid=C54376a_000)
Sony FE 85mm F1.8 (cid=C54289a_000)
Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 Di USD (F016) (cid=C54376a_000)
And then open your photo.
Does PL still bugs you?
When I look the the DxO lens sqlitedb I can see that the Tamron have a different lens_id then Zeiss/Sony although the one for Z/S more looks like non given value.
As I understand it the Zeiss, the Sony and the Tamron 85/1.8 are all designed by Tamron and the patents are held by Tamron.
Tamron is a huge optical designer who does lens design on contract.
They designed the optical construction for the lens which Zeiss used and charged far more for it as of their brand position. Sony released their own “branded version” of the same construction as well.
Perhaps the DxO lens profile engine gets confused by all this.
Or the Modules database CAFList2.db in your install is bad and should be deleted and rebuilt by PhotoLab again.
Required, I am very grateful for your comments about this. However, I do have to wonder, if all you say is actually correct then why is it taking DxO all that time to give me exactly the same explanation. How can support be confused and not know about this? And I guess that obviously if I download all profiles PL will stop nagging. The point is that I should not have to do that. Also I wonder whether my pictures get the correct correction if I do or if I do not download all 3?
You are totally right about you can not be sure the images will be corrected properly.
It was merely an idea to see if PL stops nagging and process the photos.
You can always install or uninstall one by one and see if PL actually believes it needs all three or only one or two of them.
It appears something is not fully working for your PL/Lens setup.
If you have a photo in raw that you can attach I’ll take a peek at it with my PL and dig down in the profile/module handling and see what it do.
Perhaps we can help DxO on the way so they can get this sorted.
Well I downloaded the “missing” modules and it makes no difference at all. PL recalculates the correction but nothing changes to the picture.
I then removed those two modules again, so that now they are not in my collection of installed modules, and guess what: PL stopped asking for them anyway. Go figure??
DxO really do have something strange going on there.
Let’s hope this thread will get their attention after the holidays.
Thanks again for your comments, happy holidays!
I can confirm that there’s a profile bug in PL.
I bought PL2 Elite as a gift for my brother and helped him install it as I froze upon launch while it said Importing Photlab1 something which he don’t have. He did have some old OP 9 and 11 of the free version.
I removed everything and launched PL2 again.
He entered his licens key once again and PL launched perfectly as Elite version.
He opened a photo taken with a Nikon D3 and Nikon’s 24-70/2.8.
And hold and behold - PL asked him to install every 24-70 lens available for the D3 in their DB.
So somehow PL gets confused by lenses focal length and aperture. A bug in the parsing section?
I think I’m bumping into something similar. Every now and then, I get prompted to download modules for lenses I don’t possess (The same focal length as ones I do possess)…
I’m sorry this wasn’t solved with support team.
Can you upload an image so I can investigate this module issue ?
You are number 11 in my list above. Please read my last comment following nr 10. Besides, you should not need an image the problem is perfectly clear, but I am no longer interested in it.
Same problem here…
It recognizes my Samyang 35 2.8 FE as Sony Zeiss 35 2.8 and my (adapted) Canon EF 24-85 as Konica-Minolta 24-85.
Modules for Samyang 35mm F2.8 FE will be released today so confusion will stop.
To match an image and a module we use several Exif/MakerNote information in following order:
3- LensInfo (for example : 18-35mm F3.5-5.6)
4- Current information of focal and aperture
Information 1 and 2 are not always available (especially for cameras of old generation).
Any of this information could fit several lenses (1 and 2 are supposed to be unique but all makers don’t respect that).
As we don’t support Samyang 35mm F2.8 FE PhotoLab can’t find it and falls back on Sony Zeiss 35mm F2.8 as it has same lensInfo.
About adapted Canon EF 24-85mm, we don’t support yet Canon lenses on Sony cameras.
We are currently working on it and hope to release modules soon but Exif information might give us some work so I have no date.
Thanks for the reply @Marie, though it was @CommanderBrot and not me who was asking about Samyang and Sony…
A random thought, in the ‘module download’ window, would it be possible to have an option to ‘ignore’ as well as ‘download’?
Over time, that would stop us getting prompted to download modules for lenses we don’t possess.
Adapted lenses should be a big support priority. I use Canon lenses on Canon full frame and Sony APS-C (will be gone soon) and Fuji X (alas not supported at all, should be supported with Iridient Transfomer demosaiced files which Lightroom also supports). My secondary platform is not supported by DxO but many people’s second platform is supported (Sony).
Samyang is recognized correctly as of today!
That’s what I am waiting for! I use several Canon EF lenses.