• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Another medium tele test — color fringing

Another medium tele test — color fringing

February 15, 2016 JimK Leave a Comment

This is a continuation of a test of the following lenses on the Sony a7RII:

  • Zeiss 85mm f/1.8 Batis.
  •  Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Otus.
  • Leica 90mm f/2 Apo Summicron-M ASPH.
  • AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 G.
  • Sony 90mm f/2.8 FE Macro.

The test starts here.

I’ll get back to the MTF stuff before this test is over, but today I’d like to return to the issue that some have complained about with the Batis, something that they have called chromatic aberration (CA). Here’s a post I made a few days ago that shows the phenomenon in the wild. My task today is to catch it in the laboratory, where we can more closely observe and dissect it.

The examples I’ve seen on the web and the ones I posted here showed the effect occurring in the presence of blown highlights, off-center placement, and out-of-focus portions of the image. I wanted to find out if any or all of those were strictly necessary to get the phenomenon to happen.

I created a target and photographed it wide open with the Batis with the target in the center of the image, the target in focus, and no blown highlights. Here’s a crop:

_DSC7528

The left edges of the white circles are slightly red, and the right edges are slightly blue. This is odd becasue it is a right-left effect, whereas most lens effects are symmetric about the axis. Just to make sure, let’s look at it with the Lr saturation control to +100:

_DSC7528-2

Here’s a +100 saturation image with the highlights blown and recovered:

_DSC7532

It’s no worse.

Defocusing gets us this:

_DSC7534

It’s much easier to see the fringing, as well as false color in the Siemens star. Cranking up the saturation to +100 shows it even more clearly:

_DSC7534-2

If we blow the highlights and attempt recovery in Lr, we get this:

_DSC7538

Again, the effect is not related to blown highlights.

Turning the saturation to +100 gives us this:

_DSC7538-2

OK, I think we’ve got it. Image in focus means tight fringing. Blown highlights won’t cause fringing or make it worse. OOF, we see mare apparent fringing, and blowing the highlights doesn’t make it worse.  Whatever is causing the effect seems to be related to longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA).

In order to proceed, I need to decide whether to take a bunch of images with camera motion that can produce an amour of defocusing that will be the same across the lenses in the test, or to try a 3D target and do everything in one shot for each lens for each aperture.

Before I do that, I’m going back and looking at the slanted edge color fringing tests I did a few days ago. In those tests, I looked at the horizontal edges, not the vertical ones. The horizontal edges appear clean in this test; all the problems are in the vertical ones.

Stay tuned.

Postscript. Although it’s certainly not an intended use of Imatest, we can use the program to look at the edge profiles and thus see the fringing of the OOF image more clearly and see that it’s not symmetric about the lens axis:

dots right

dots left

See the red highlighting in the inset to see which edge we’re looking at in which picture.

The Last Word

← Another medium tele test — MTF Another medium tele test — more on-axis color fringing →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.