• 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 / Visualizing lens aberrations, one at a time, revisited

Visualizing lens aberrations, one at a time, revisited

July 20, 2025 JimK 8 Comments

I have now constructed a more accurate lens simulator than the one I talked about last month. The new one takes phase effects into account, and uses 31 wavelengths between 400 and 700 nanometers on 10 nanometer spacing instead of three wavelengths. This is the first post with images from the simulator.

When analyzing the effects of lens aberrations, it can be surprisingly difficult to see what’s really going on just by looking at natural photographs. Real-world images are full of detail and variation, which can mask or muddle the impact of individual aberrations. To better understand how specific aberrations affect image formation, it’s helpful to isolate them and examine their influence under controlled conditions.

In this post, I’ll compare the results of applying a set of common optical aberrations one at a time with two simple synthetic targets: point spread function (PSF) grids and sinusoidal Siemens stars. These tools offer a much clearer view into how aberrations distort the image plane. PSF grids show how a lens blurs or distorts a scene of idealized point sources across the field, while Siemens stars reveal changes in resolution and contrast as a function of angle and spatial frequency.

This post won’t cover natural images, although that’s my eventual goal. For now, we’ll focus on visual clarity and building intuition with the cleanest possible examples before tackling the complexity of real-world scenes.

Lateral chromatic aberration, or LaCA, occurs when a lens focuses different wavelengths of light at slightly different positions in the image plane, but all in the same focal plane. This leads to color fringes near the edges of high-contrast features, especially near the corners of the image. Unlike longitudinal chromatic aberration, LaCA does not blur the image but causes misregistration of the red, green, and blue components. It is often strongest at the edges of the field and minimal or absent in the center. Correction typically involves aligning the color channels digitally or through lens design choices.

 

Longitudinal chromatic aberration, or LoCA, arises when different wavelengths of light come to focus at different distances along the optical axis. This results in color-dependent blur: for example, red light may be in focus while blue light is slightly front- or back-focused. LoCA is most noticeable in out-of-focus regions and can cause magenta or green fringes around blurred edges. Unlike LaCA, which shifts colors laterally across the image, LoCA changes the sharpness of each color independently. It is most prominent at wide apertures and difficult to correct in postprocessing, making lens design the primary method of control.

Spherical aberration (SA) occurs when light rays passing through the outer parts of a lens are focused at different points along the optical axis than rays passing through the center. This leads to a softening of the image, particularly around bright highlights, and can reduce overall contrast. SA is most apparent when the lens is used wide open and tends to decrease as the aperture is stopped down. It affects all colors equally and is typically most noticeable in the center of the image. Some lenses deliberately include controlled amounts of SA to produce a specific rendering style, especially in portrait photography.

Astigmatism in a lens causes points of light to blur into lines rather than circles, with the blur orientation depending on the direction of the rays. It arises when the lens focuses horizontal and vertical details at slightly different distances, leading to a mismatch between sagittal and tangential focal planes. This results in image areas, especially away from the center, appearing stretched or smeared in one direction. The effect typically worsens toward the edges of the frame and can vary with focus distance and aperture.

Coma is an aberration that affects off-axis points, causing them to appear as asymmetrical, comet-like smears rather than sharp points. It occurs because rays from different parts of the lens aperture are focused at slightly different positions in the image plane. The result is a flaring or tailing effect that radiates away from the image center, often most noticeable in high-contrast point sources like stars or distant lights. Coma increases with distance from the optical axis and is more pronounced at wider apertures.

Defocus occurs, as you would expect, when the image is out of focus.

Trefoil is an aberration that shows three lobes, and typically gets stronger away from the lens axis.

Tetrafoil is similar to trefoil, except that there are four lobes.

The Last Word

← Bob Dylan reviews the Fuji 110mm f/2 GF lens Combining aberrations — defocus →

Comments

  1. Oren Grad says

    July 20, 2025 at 5:37 pm

    This is excellent, thank you!

    Can you do some through-focus series on the PSFs?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      July 20, 2025 at 5:44 pm

      Of course! I’ll work through aberrations two at a time, then I’ll post transfocal series. It turns out a lot can be learned from studying the tranfocal behavior and how defocus interacts with the aberrations.

      Reply
  2. CarVac says

    July 21, 2025 at 6:22 am

    I was surprised by the appearance of the astigmatism rendering but I guess you simulated the tangential and sagittal surfaces of best focus straddling a plane, whereas in real lenses with astigmatism (such as older ultrawides) you’ll often see one of the orientations having a relatively flat focal plane with the other bending away, causing linear smearing when at best center focus.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      July 23, 2025 at 12:20 pm

      You’ve nailed it. I’m trying to walk before running here.

      Reply
  3. Paul R says

    July 23, 2025 at 12:13 pm

    Cool, thank you.

    I’m confused by the astigmatism simulation. It seems to be blurring tangential and radial directions equally. Is it trying to show both kinds of astigmatism at the same time?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      July 23, 2025 at 12:20 pm

      To really get a good idea of what’s going on with astigmatism I’ll have to show you how it interacts with defocus. I’m working on that. Thanks for the impetus to move it up in the priority list.

      Reply
      • JimK says

        July 23, 2025 at 4:09 pm

        Here is the animation: https://youtu.be/TDC4uibmLfo

        Reply
        • Paul R says

          July 25, 2025 at 8:28 am

          Ah, thank you. That animation tracks more closely with my understandings of it. I’ve assumed that tangential astigmatism leads to dynamic-looking “swirly” bokeh. The radial kind leads to the more familiar smearing of detail into the corners.

          Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

November 2025
S M T W T F S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  
« Oct    

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

  • MikaFoxx on ISO setting for raw files
  • JimK on Subjectivity in engineering design
  • MikaFoxx on Subjectivity in engineering design
  • Pieter Kers on Using Curves adjustment layers in Photoshop
  • Paul R on Exposure metering
  • XUE on Dark Current in CMOS Sensors: Where It Comes From, and How Cooling Helps
  • Paul R on ISO setting for raw files
  • JimK on Pixel Response Non-Uniformity: Fixed Pattern Noise in the Light
  • Jared Bush on Pixel Response Non-Uniformity: Fixed Pattern Noise in the Light
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S pixel shift, visuals

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.