16
\$\begingroup\$

My EOS has the option to correct known lens-aberration which is activated at the moment.

I use Lightroom (5.2) for post-processing, which can also correct lens-aberration.

Is it a problem to activate both cam- and Lightroom-correction or is the Lightroom-correction smart enough to recognize that there is nothing (or not so much) too to anymore?

Mainly I use raw-format and seldom (but not never) jpeg. I suppose raw doesn’t safe the cam-correction info, so I guess my question is only relevant for jpeg, isn´t it?

Update EXIF:

I was looking to the EXIF und IPTC informations in Lightroom, but no attribute tells me that the cam correct lens-aberrations.

Update Test:

I do a simple test. Post results as a separate answer for better discussion.

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Great question. I have not investigated yet but the general guideline would be to avoid double profile-based correction and that detection-based ones are fine. Meaning if your lens is profiled to have 4% barrel distortion, then two time processing would give you an image with 4% pincushion, the same for vignetting will give two brighter corners. \$\endgroup\$
    – Itai
    Commented Dec 4, 2013 at 13:44
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Posting as a comment because I'm unsure, but I thought there was EXIF data that indicated if lens correction had been applied. It might be something specifically that Canon keeps track of though. I also could just be losing my mind as I don't have a file in front of me to check. \$\endgroup\$
    – AJ Henderson ♦
    Commented Dec 4, 2013 at 14:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AJ Henderson: interesting hint. Will look for this next time I get my camera in my hands. \$\endgroup\$
    – Micha
    Commented Dec 5, 2013 at 9:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ Interesting question. You can test it on some gridded scene, aka square paper exercise book, it would take just a few minutes. (I don't have my camera here). Then post the results please. \$\endgroup\$
    – Petr Újezdský
    Commented Dec 10, 2013 at 21:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Petr Újezdský. Good thought. I plan to test this next weekend. \$\endgroup\$
    – Micha
    Commented Dec 11, 2013 at 6:46

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
5
\$\begingroup\$

This only matters for JPEG (and the embedded JPEG previews).

I would say it comes down to which you like better. If you're shooting JPEG it'd be nice to have it done in camera. You would probably get better results from the camera as it can (though depending on the implementation, may not) use the RAW data for its corrections whereas LR would be using the rendered JPEG. However, you would have more control than a simple on/off if you do it in LR which you may find yields better results for you.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Ok, thanks for answer (+1 for that). But what happens when shooting in jpg when both corrections are activate. Will there be a overcorrection? \$\endgroup\$
    – Micha
    Commented Dec 4, 2013 at 13:37
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I suppose it's possible. I'm not in a position to test it, but it seems that it'd be fairly obvious if it is and LR is non-destructive so you could fix it if you need to. You can create a couple of presets, one with and one without the corrections enabled, and if you know you did a shoot with it enabled in camera use the preset with it disabled in LR and vice versa. \$\endgroup\$
    – tenmiles
    Commented Dec 4, 2013 at 14:06
1
\$\begingroup\$

LR does not apply lens correction to JPEGs, only to RAWs (unless forced to do so).

Enable the correction on both: the camera will give you corrected JPEGs when you shoot JPEGs, LR will give you corrected JPEGs starting from the (uncorrected) RAW.

The correction won't be applied twice unless you really force it manually by opening a JPEG in LR and then by manually selecting the lens used (something LR does not even get automatically on JPEGs) and applying again the correction.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

I got the chance to do some simple "tests".

Setup

I took my old 18-55 IS ll Kit on 18mm with aperture 3.5 (should be my "baldest lens") and do one shot with and one shot without camera-correction.

Interpretation

First I look at the photos in Lightroom without any Lightroom-correction. Photo with camera-correction (let call it Photo b) was little bit brighter in the corners. In a next step a activate Lightroom lens-correction. Both images become much better but Photo b stays still a little bit brighter in the corners. Interestingly there was not much different between jpg and raw.

Result

My interpretation is that Lightroom correction is not smart in terms of "looking" if the picture was corrected but add his own (from my point of view much better) correction on top.

In conclusion I will disable my cam correction and only use Lightroom. This is y point of view. tenmiles answer (with comment) seem to be correct It would be nice if someone can verify my "test".

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
0
\$\begingroup\$

I performed the test on RAW files as well using the EF-S18-135 STM at 18mm and f3.5 and saw no difference between in-camera lens correction on or off in Lightroom. I did see a corner brightness difference in Digital Photo Professional but that might have been the embedded JPEG preview. The corrected image was close to evenly bright. DPP did not correct lens distortion like Lightroom also does with just profile correction enabled. So it seems to me that the in-camera lens correction has no effect if you are using just Lightroom.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.