View Full Version : DxO and missing module camera/lens combinations
04-30-2011, 12:24 PM
Does anyone on here who does not follow the Panoguide forum or Facebook Panoramic Photographers use DxO, we are trying to get them to increase the number of modules available for use with fisheye lenses and other common lenses used in our particular field of photography, I am posting this on several forums to see if we can get enough of us to pressure them into bringing our lenses to the top of the list and they have asked for input on this.
04-30-2011, 09:50 PM
Thx for sharing Neil,
It is interesting to read the DxO answers, not the best for their reputation, a "little bit arrogant". No Sigma 8mm/f3.5 modules, Samyang is "rubbish".
As a DxO customer since several years I will add a comment that I use other lenses besides fisheye lenses, but that I expect DxO as a "full range program". This means that though a smaller group of customers use fisheye lenses, that there is well a need of them to fill the whole portfolio. This is what I think a customer orientated company should do. Otherwise they have to set on the homepage: " We do modules only for those lenses which we can earn a lot of money with and we decide about a lens to be worth the effort of making a module."
May be we can change their behavior by giving them a lot of inputs.
04-30-2011, 11:16 PM
Agreed, I have posted another email from them today on the Panoguide thread, they seem to be reacting positively but need input to push it further......
I use DxO but do not follow the Panoguide forum or Facebook Panoramic Photographers (perhaps I should - I will look into it) and am happy to support your cause, but raise the question "Do you realy want DxO to 'correct' for fisheye lenses?".
I use a Nikon 10.5mm fisheye, which is suported by DxO and this is the result - not really what I expected, DxO has (in my opinion) over-corrected.
05-03-2011, 12:08 PM
Thx for sharing your pics. There is a lot of software around and every one of us has to take his own decision and workflow.
We can always use manual settings to correct the result. This depends on personal taste.
The basic question to my concern is that DxO does not respect the "Panorama Group" as a serious customers group. Similar to the +50 group of people who have the money, are settled, and have been called to be to "old" to be focused by marketing.
Main goal on this thread is the basic to present DxO that there is a "+50 group = pano users" who are worth to spend some attention to. In this time of recession other companies might be glad to add a 5% new customers to their portfolio.
So let us support Neil's engagement to tell Companies that "though we are a small group", every single amount of money counts in the companies pocket to survive.
Let us tell them, that "+50 group" will be the future to save them basic money besides other money on the bank account.
BTW: to newbies, Hugh has done a lot of serious basic inputs to this forum. Thx Hugh.
Thank you for the kind words.
Yes, I agree that DxO should consider all Customers and I support Neil in his cause and have added some requests through the DxO software.
It's a pity that the DxO people don't have the same Customer focus as the Nodal Ninja people, but I am sure we will get there in the end!
All the best, Hugh.
I don't know if is the "cage rattling" from the panorama enthusiasts, but as a DxO user the DxO people have sent me an email requesting taking part in an on-line questionnaire, which I have done, emphasizing that more should be done to accommodate us and ti include more 3rd party fisheye lenses.
This could develop into a dialogue so I think we need to b clear what we wish DxO to do with a fisheye image.
From the examples of images with a Nikon 10.5mm lens earlier in this thread it would appear that DxO tries to rectify the huge lens distortion produced by the lens to give a "plane" image, but is this really what we need?
I have not had an opportunity to experiment further since my last posting, but will have a look at what DxO can and cannot do with the 10.5mm lens it already supports.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2015 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.