Can/does Exif data show the lens used?

[Muse]

I have Opanda installed and don't see data on the lens I used. I expected to see that. It's not available when shooting with a DSLR?
- - - -
"In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is freedom, in water there is bacteria." - Old German Proverb

 

[corkyg]

I can always access EXIF data using Irfanview/Information/EXIF. That works with any camera I have, DSLR or P&S. In the case of the DSLR, it does indeed show the lens data, the f/stop, smd the focal length if a zoom, and other details.

Will try and find a DSLR sample.

 

[RobDickinson]

Bridge shows what lens I have used (5d2)

 

[shortylickens]

It can but not on every camera. My D40 doesnt pass that info on, even though its digitally controlled. It does tell the zoom length in mm though, which is practically the same thing. If its 30mm then I know it was the 18-55 lens, if its 100 then I know it was the 55-200 lens. Not like I have a bunch of them.

Oh, and I use ACDsee for reference.

 

[CuriousMike]

LR shows info on the lens.

 

[Scooby Doo]

A while ago I wrote a little .net app that lets you modify the lens info for the old manual lenes. That way I can identifiy which one I used.

 

[Muse]

I used to use irfanview, just installed the latest version. It's not showing the lens info, but the focal length of some of the shots I'm looking at clue me in what lens I must have been using. It's not conclusive, but I am almost sure I didn't have my 55-300 mm lens that day but my 18-250mm instead. The body is a Pentax K-x. The lens I think I was using was a Pentax SMC DA 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 ED AL IF Lens, not the Pentax K-x 55-300mm kit lens. I was hoping the EXIF data would include the focal range of the lens like the info shown by CuriousMike. The "Lens Type" EXIF data shown by irfanview is blank.

LR shows info on the lens.

What is LR?
- - - -
I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it. - Mark Twain

 

[radhak]

I used to use irfanview, just installed the latest version. It's not showing the lens info, but the focal length of some of the shots I'm looking at clue me in what lens I must have been using. It's not conclusive, but I am almost sure I didn't have my 55-300 mm lens that day but my 18-250mm instead. The body is a Pentax K-x. The lens I think I was using was a Pentax SMC DA 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 ED AL IF Lens, not the Pentax K-x 55-300mm kit lens. I was hoping the EXIF data would include the focal range of the lens like the info shown by CuriousMike. The "Lens Type" EXIF data shown by irfanview is blank.

What is LR?

- - - -
"Eternity is in love with the products of Time." - William Blake

I guess LR = Lightroom. One of these days I'm gonna be able to afford it, or something equivalent.

The lens info would definitely be useful. Wonder if my default image manager Picasa shows it; gotta check.

 

[Throckmorton]

Try PhotoME. It shows more EXIF data than Opanda


radhak, Lightroom 4 costs $150 now, so less than most lenses

 

[corkyg]

Try PhotoME. It shows more EXIF data than Opanda

A great little program! Shows exactly the camera and lens for a givien photo. Thanks for the link! The price is right, so it joins my toolkit!

 

[CuriousMike]

LR = lightroom.

Picasa shows lots of details, but not the lens info (per my above LR example.)

LR can be found on sale for ~$129.

 

[CuriousMike]

Wow, PhotoME is nice. I installed the FireFox extension as well and now it's super convenient.

 

[Muse]

Wow, PhotoME is nice. I installed the FireFox extension as well and now it's super convenient.

Just installed PhotoME, opened a JPG file from the shoot I was curious about and it does indeed show the lens used: smc PENTAX-DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 ED AL [IF], copied right from the PhotoME window.

Thanks! :thumbsup:
- - - -
"Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it." - Goethe

 

[radhak]

Try PhotoME. It shows more EXIF data than Opanda


radhak, Lightroom 4 costs $150 now, so less than most lenses

Wow - PhotoMe is better than many other!

And now that you mentioned it, I took at second look at LR - and it really is cheap. Somehow I remember it used to be much more expensive ?!?

Weird : Checking Amazon, LR 2.0 still costs $300, while LR 4.0 is available at $118 ?!? Can somebody explain that?

And wonder-of-wonders, the Student edition is only $37! Since I have a middle-schooler at home and she'd use it too, I can morally buy that, right? (Not that Adobe minds - it'd be completely legal as per their eligibility conditions).

 

[CuriousMike]

Yes, LR got significantly cheaper with v4.0

 

[Muse]

Yes, LR got significantly cheaper with v4.0

Is it way better than Picasa? Must be, eh? It's for significant bucks.

 

[CuriousMike]

Is it way better than Picasa? Must be, eh? It's for significant bucks.

Picasa is like a good P&S camera. It can do most anything an average photographer would want.

LR is for the photo hobbyist / advanced photographer who's a little more ( to a lot more ) serious.

If you only ever take photos in JPG mode, than you probably don't need LR.
If you've considered taking photos in RAW mode and understand the benefits, LR would gives you more latitude to correct/enhance photos.

 

[Muse]

Picasa is like a good P&S camera. It can do most anything an average photographer would want.

LR is for the photo hobbyist / advanced photographer who's a little more ( to a lot more ) serious.

If you only ever take photos in JPG mode, than you probably don't need LR.
If you've considered taking photos in RAW mode and understand the benefits, LR would gives you more latitude to correct/enhance photos.

I have a copy of Photoshop Elements 6. Is that in the same category/league?
- - - -
Rome was not built in a day, but nowadays it can be destroyed in five seconds.

 

[Muse]

Picasa is like a good P&S camera. It can do most anything an average photographer would want.

LR is for the photo hobbyist / advanced photographer who's a little more ( to a lot more ) serious.

If you only ever take photos in JPG mode, than you probably don't need LR.
If you've considered taking photos in RAW mode and understand the benefits, LR would gives you more latitude to correct/enhance photos.

I have a copy of Photoshop Elements 6. Is that in the same category/league as Lightroom or Picasa?

 

[Throckmorton]

I don't think Photoshop Elements even lets you adjust curves. It's for editing photos, while Lightroom is for postprocessing and managing. Download the trial and see if you like it.

RAW vs JPEG has nothing to do with anything. I postprocess all my pictures with LR.

 

[SecurityTheatre]

Lightoom is a little bit more about "managing" and "workflow" as it imports all your photos and lets you work on them in batch, as well as compare, export, etc in large batches.

Photoshop is a tool for editing a single image, one at a time. Very different concepts, even if they do overlap in capabilities to some extent.

 

[Muse]

I don't think Photoshop Elements even lets you adjust curves. It's for editing photos, while Lightroom is for postprocessing and managing. Download the trial and see if you like it.

RAW vs JPEG has nothing to do with anything. I postprocess all my pictures with LR.

Do you usually shoot RAW? I haven't gotten into it but I know I should. My DSLR supports it, of course. I'm going on a trip this weekend and will be shooting a ton, a family affair. Last time I did this it was all JPG, but maybe this time I should shoot RAW. Can I batch process RAW images into JPGs? I want to be able to send people DVDs full of shots.
- - - -
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind...it doesn't matter" - Mark Twain

 

[PhoenixEnigma]

Just to add a little weirdness to the OPs question: apparently, some lenses lie.

 

[CuriousMike]

A good exercise for you is to shoot in RAW+JPG - the downsides to this is your memory card will fill up sooner, and burst shooting may lose frames/second.

The upside is if you take a photo that you really like in JPG, but the highlights are under or over exposed, the RAW file will give you more 'data' to work with and can save some improperly exposed photos.

 

[radhak]

Just saw this on Picasa - the Lens information is available on the properties panel