Lightroom: is this Chromatic Aberration and, if so, how do I get rid of it?

Zone99

I'm trying out an experiment with a few different lenses:

#1) Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ED AF (push-pull)
#2) Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ED D AF (two-ring)
#3) Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 ATX AF

I've had lens #1 for years and have always had good luck with it but the use case has changed and I need a lens with a tripod mount.

I'm trying lens #2 and #3 but finding they have, what I believe to be, chromatic aberration with both the lenses.

The reason I'm not sure is because lens #1 never had the problem.

The question is: if it is, how do I get rid of it in Lightroom? I've tried using the correcting techniques outlined in guides but no dice. It doesn't seem to have any affect.

Here's a sample from lens #2:


Here's a sample from lens #3:


Thoughts? How to avoid it? How to correct it?

pathfinder

Some will call it purple fringing which is the blooming of a silicon sensor at the margin of a very bright highlight, but it looks like CA to me.

I routinely correct CA in ACR OR LR as I wrote here - http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=159524

You cannot avoid all CA; even very high quality L glass MAY display it from time to time. Primes USUALLY have less than zooms, and travel zooms are usually the worst. Good glass usually has less than lesser glass - Duh!! (Good Zeiss glass is among the best.) With zooms CA will vary as a function of focal length and aperture. With primes, once you figure the settings in ACR to correct them, they will not vary that much.

DXO has parameters for many lenses to correct for CA for that specific lens, but again I do not own DXO.

Modest CA is pretty easy to reduce significantly in ACR. It is part of my routine workflow.

There are techniques for purple fringing as well - googling will find them quickly, but I have had no real need for them, so I don't have a link handy.

Zone99

pathfinder wrote: »

Some will call it purple fringing which is the blooming of a silicon sensor at the margin of a very bright highlight, but it looks like CA to me.

I routinely correct CA in ACR OR LR as I wrote here - http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=159524

You cannot avoid all CA; even very high quality L glass MAY display it from time to time. Primes USUALLY have less than zooms, and travel zooms are usually the worst. Good glass usually has less than lesser glass - Duh!! (Good Zeiss glass is among the best.) With zooms CA will vary as a function of focal length and aperture. With primes, once you figure the settings in ACR to correct them, they will not vary that much.

DXO has parameters for many lenses to correct for CA for that specific lens, but again I do not own DXO.

Modest CA is pretty easy to reduce significantly in ACR. It is part of my routine workflow.

There are techniques for purple fringing as well - googling will find them quickly, but I have had no real need for them, so I don't have a link handy.

Thanks! I'll google for more info on purple fringing.

Question, though: is it only correctable in RAW?

I shoot JPEG for things like soccer because I want as many shots as possible of a sequence. RAW is just too slow even on my D300.

pathfinder

Zone99 wrote: »

Thanks! I'll google for more info on purple fringing.

Question, though: is it only correctable in RAW?

I shoot JPEG for things like soccer because I want as many shots as possible of a sequence. RAW is just too slow even on my D300.

You CAN run jpgs through ACR, of course, but to be honest, I have never tried to correct the CA in jpgs in that manner. Generally jpgs are more "brittle" and tolerate aggressive changes in ACR much more poorly than RAW files, since jpgs have so much less data to begin with than RAW files.

In Photoshop, you can look in "Filter>Distort>Lens Correction" for tools to correct CA in jpgs a s well. Since I rarely shoot jpgs, I do my corrections in RAW - not the only way, just how I do my processing.

Enitsugua

Zone99 wrote: »

I shoot JPEG for things like soccer because I want as many shots as possible of a sequence. RAW is just too slow even on my D300.

That makes no sense. No noticeable difference in JPG or RAW on a D300 as far as speed, if you have a decent CF card.

Zone99

Enitsugua wrote: »

That makes no sense. No noticeable difference in JPG or RAW on a D300 as far as speed, if you have a decent CF card.

Ok, then maybe I'm using my camera wrong. I'll have to check the manual again. I get about half the recording speed in RAW that I do with JPEG.

The manual states you get about 2.5fps with RAW.

Enitsugua

Zone99 wrote: »

Ok, then maybe I'm using my camera wrong. I'll have to check the manual again. I get about half the recording speed in RAW that I do with JPEG.

The manual states you get about 2.5fps with RAW.

Only if you have RAW set to 14-bit. Set it to 12-bit.

Zone99

Enitsugua wrote: »

Only if you have RAW set to 14-bit. Set it to 12-bit.

Oooohhhhhh......:jawdrop

SoCalAl

Pathfinder, I have had exactly the same experiences as you with the CA/fringing issues. I'm shooting a Nikon D3 & Nikkor 24-70 & 70-200 VRII lenses. It seems like the problem is agravated when the sun is to my back & ~25 to 35 degrees to either side, 25~40 degrees up from the horizon. Bright white or metallic surfaces are the major culprit. Same issues trying to minimize the effects in LR 2.7. Have just downloaded LR3 Beta but haven't had a chance to see if it works better for this problem. If I had the "ultimate" image except for the CA would probably deal with it pixel by pixel. Have also found that using the "Detail" slider in the sharpening mode makes the CA/fringing POP!!! Now mostly keep that @ zero and very carefully adjust depending upon what I'm shooting & needs. Also tried longer lens hoods and that really doesn't seem to minimize the issue. I just be very careful where the sun is located when possible. Doesn't seem to matter much RAW or .jpg.

pathfinder

I almost never use the "Detail" slider at anything but the default value, but I do not reduce it to zero either.

You have excellent glass, are you sure this is CA and not blooming?

I was not decrying the quality of my lenses, either, I think this is just sort of the state of the art, even with good (L) glass or Nikon glass as well.

SoCalAl

Pathfinder

I don't see this as a brand or specific lens issue both Canon & Nikon are excellent with their technology, plus others. It is what it is. This is all fantastic technology no matter what brand! We are lucky. I'm looking at the processing side of this at this point and trying to learn.
The angle of the sun in relation to the camera position definitely seems to have it's affect, at least on my setup and where I shoot. I primarily shoot the 70~200 and Motocross at one track. That is most of my shooting experience, 3 years & 180,000 shots. Definitely have blooming and it is predominant on surfaces that have a clear coat or are translucent, helmets (clear coat), fenders (translucent) and can present itself in many colors. There is also CA, mostly blue with a little red, and I typically get that on clean white riding gear, some type of fabric or non-shiny surface or metalic surfaces. All of this depends if the sun is coming over one shoulder or the other, other angles it mostly non-existant. This is obviously not a situation that most people shoot in. The track is on the side of a hill and sometimes one step backward will drop me 5~25". Played that game! Changing positions in most cases not an option.
Generally shooting out & about, something other than motocross, very few issues. Last night I was playing with some images (on my ailing computer) @ 800% to see exactly what control was doing what in the LR sharpening module. That's when I confirmed what the "Detail" control was doing. Try it. Take any in-focus image with CA or any edge "defect" and see what the effect of the "Detail" slider is at 800%. Turning off or down the detail will affect the over all sharpness of the image but will possibly reduce or eliminate some edge "defects". A "Detail" setting of 5 can pop an edge defect, raw or .jpg.

I am a beginner and will take any feedback I can get on this subject or any other for that matter! Doing my best to learn more about the processing end of things. (: I have learned a huge amount lurking on this forum with a long way to go!!! Maybe this all just a personal problem for me.... Thank you all for all the help you don't know you have given me! If I knew it all I'd be posting this from Cancun with a Nikon in one hand and a Canon in the other!!! I have not forgotten the women.... That's a different forum. (: Everything in this post is subjective.....

Giphsub

Zone99 wrote: »

Oooohhhhhh......:jawdrop

Hey I never knew that either! And that slow rate really frustrated me when shooting birds! Wish I had known that sooner. Does the compression setting in the D300 affect this as well?

Enitsugua

Giphsub wrote: »

Hey I never knew that either! And that slow rate really frustrated me when shooting birds! Wish I had known that sooner. Does the compression setting in the D300 affect this as well?

No.

And, you do not need the grip to get even higher FPS on the D300/700. But you will only get 9 frames in a burst (versus up to 40 with the grip) at the faster frame rate. See the following for how:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG5UKwgGRJI

Giphsub

Well there you go! Thanks for the link.