Puzzled by Canon EXIF info in Gallery
 

I have noticed before, but today, with so many excellent pictures posted by Canon users, I have to ask the question.

I always look at the exif when there is one available to look at lens choice, aperture and shutter speed info. So far I have only noticed it on Canon where the lens used and the 35mm equivalent dont add up ........
For example ' 62.0mm (35mm equivalent: 504mm) ' , ' 300.0mm (35mm equivalent: 1830mm) '.

I guess that the first figure is correct but wanted to check. I may otherwise make idiot comments.

Don

Don,

I too noticed that the maths dont add up from the Canon's. The size of the sensor is the cause as its is read as 6mm (approx) from the Exif generating the bogus 35mm equivalent.

Does this happen over at Birdforum?

Odd isn't it. Not much we can do about it, it's just in-built gallery software extraction. We do not show exif data at birdforum.
cheers,
Andy

I am quite happy to take the first number as long as that is the correct one. I think we may need a Canon poster to check their exifs and see if they stack up.

I have asked an aperture question too on this one http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...hoto=505&cat=2

Don

I noticed this too. I've also noticed that postcardcv's photos using a 350D do add up correctly. No-one else that uses Canons seem to. Different firmware perhaps?

Duncan.

I noticed for the 300D it multiplies 35mm equivalent by 6.1 instead of 1.6. A typo maybe.

Rob

I'm confused ... is it the EXIF data you are looking at or is it data that is calculated by the website (perhaps from the EXIF data)?

For viewing the EXIF data of online photos, I use the Opanda IEXIF extension for Internet Explorer (it's freeware). Available at: http://www.opanda.com/en/iexif/index.html

Not sure about Gallery uploads but the EXIF on attachments to a post is not altered in anyway: http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...8&d=1135384419

The uploaded photo was from a Canon 20D.

I am referring to the data directly below an image opened in the gallery. Scolling back to the image to understand the technique used. I would assume other members are as using this as well.

I will look at the link you have posted.

If I post an image in a post I will explain any relevant info rather than expect people to guess. I am aware that many members may be on dial up connections and would therefore only open the image if it was of interest.

Don

PS I have been through pics I have posted on threads here and BF, and compared thread views and image views. It shows that most often the text supplies the required info, and only those with good connection rates or have a specific interest open the image. On BF you wil find most of my pics in the Tripods Forum on threads started by myself. If you were to look at exif info on the images I am posting in the Flash thread you would be looking at info that would be totally meaningless.

Must be just certain canon cameras - I've just uploaded a picture (not a particularly good one I hasten to add) to my gallery to check the data and all appears to be in order on my 350d. http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...500&ppuser=818

I'd noticed the anomily earlier but hadnt attributed it to canon cameras. Very curious though!

350D has a crop factor of 1.6x, doesn't it? Your fox photo shows over 2.0x