why so much chromatic aberation with D300 RAWs?

I bought my new D300 few days ago and I'm still shooting to
test it. I noticed to much chromatic aberation in RAW files and I think
it's to much even in situation with no extremenly high contrast.
I use the same lenses I used with my D80 and D70 camera and I never had

any problem ever (even with the cheap 18-70). It was after processing the D300 files that I ever noticed and had to deal with chromatic aberation.

I haven't read any test considering this a serious problem but for me it is really annoying even if it's fixable(even though I don't think it's 100%) by RAW converters - why having one more thing to worry about after the shooting?

Maybe Nikon found a way making us use CaptureNX...
And don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Nikon fun and supporter
but this is really buging me...

The d300 has a fantastic CA reducing process but you need to shoot Jpeg : ((( If your shooting RAW, all bets are off since your using....well, RAW data. Rule of thumb is that shooting RAW will yield normal results when shooting wide open dealing with CA. If you jump to the jpeg side, the in camera CA reduction process will help out a lot. Also, the D3 has the same function. A good feature if I may say so....PS, what lenses are you using??? Take note that the d300 is going to be more sensitive than other cameras due to the fact that there are more pixels crammed into a smaller space. The 70-200 2.8 VR looks a bit softer on my d300 than on my d3 for that same reason. Smaller pixel size+ denser pixel configuration on a DX format sensor= compromised results when dealing with less than perfect pro glass. And, in my case with the pro quality of the 70-200 as well.....
-Dave

Just a guess but the program your using may have had a good default for the D70 or perhaps you even set the default yourself , if so you may need to set it for the D300......or use NX
--
Gene from Western Pa

http://imageevent.com/grc6
http://grc225.zenfolio.com/
FZ10....20 and 30 and FZ18

D50 ....D80 - 18 to 200VR- 50mm 1.8 - 80 to 400 OS



Just trying to learn and it's slow going!

What is the software that you are having this problem with?
--
Stan ;o()



In the spirit of Occam’s Razor one should embrace the less complicated formulation or simply put, less is more.

How are you processing, what are you in camera settings for picture controls and samples with EXIF data and we can help you. Otherwise we are guessing.

I can say that the CA correction facility in NX is VERY effective. Basically, it cleans up the image without any visible trace that any action has been taken. i have a Sigma 12-24mm DG which will show about 2 pixels of CA at hard white edges when used at any aperture wider than f8. Because the default state for NX is Auto CA ON, I normally don't ever see any evidence of CA with this lens. I have to take the time to dig into the menu and turn it off to see how this lens actually looks without any CA correction applied. Which lets me see quite clearly just how effective NX is at cleaning up CA and I repeat it is VERY effective.

Bottomline, give NX a whirl or just shoot JPG and let the camera do the work. And yeah, NX is a Boat Anchor. However it does do some things very well and if you can live with is horrible resource utilization it is a pretty good editor for the D300.

I been put off by the less than desired user-interface of Capture NX and am using LightRoom.

I got a older Sigma 2.8 18-50 lens that's got quite noticeable CA and so often spend a lot of time correcting them in LR, but the result is not always 100% satisfactory. The CA can be so bad sometimes where the CA correction sliders simply can achieve a balance where the red/mag or blu/yellow CA is totally eliminated and I have to do localized corrective adjustment in PS(that’s a pain)…

Do you have any chance had worked with LR also? If so is NX much better than LR in this regards?

Anybody else that have used/compared both NX and LR regarding CA correction is welcome to share you knowledge too.

monte12345 said:

I can say that the CA correction facility in NX is VERY effective.
Basically, it cleans up the image without any visible trace that any
action has been taken. i have a Sigma 12-24mm DG which will show
about 2 pixels of CA at hard white edges when used at any aperture
wider than f8. Because the default state for NX is Auto CA ON, I
normally don't ever see any evidence of CA with this lens. I have to
take the time to dig into the menu and turn it off to see how this
lens actually looks without any CA correction applied. Which lets me
see quite clearly just how effective NX is at cleaning up CA and I
repeat it is VERY effective.

Bottomline, give NX a whirl or just shoot JPG and let the camera do
the work. And yeah, NX is a Boat Anchor. However it does do some
things very well and if you can live with is horrible resource
utilization it is a pretty good editor for the D300.

Click to expand...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8230549@N08/

Thanks for all your answers .

Actually I'm refering always to RAW cause I never used JPG with any of the cameras (D70, D80, D300). I use PS and CaptureNX and I'm not a novice user, so I can deal with the problem and fix it with software.

What I'm saying is why deal with it with D300 when I never notice even a hint of it with older models (the settings to PS were always default to 0 cause I never had to do any corrections) with the same lenses (even the cheap ones)
Maybe it's because the the extra 2.1Mp than the D80 but it sounds too much or

maybe being suspicious I would say Nikon could fix it through but it's all about marketing: (1) What a great job with JPGS in camera processing!
(2) What a great software CaptureNX is!

So I have been using Capture 4 and then NX for my RAW shooting and Picture Publisher for my JPG shooting. BTW, Picture Publisher has to be at least 10 years old at this point so it doesn't feature any of the recent innovations. However, since it was originally written for a 486 based machine it's a freakin ROCKET for the simple tasks normally needed for JPG files. I can open and edit 1800 dpi scans from my 4x5 negitives at about the same speed as the 6mp RAW files from my D70 in Capture 4. It now seems that if you want pure speed, the best choice is way old software on a new platform.

AS for the CA correction in NX, I think that you'll probably find that it's the slution that your looking for. As I noted, I really have to dig down in the menus and turn it off in order to make any CA visible with my selection of lenses. I've also found that by turning it on and off that it does not appear to have any impact on fine detail. I suspect that hte reason it works so well is because Nikon knows their image sensor better than anyone else. Which gives them a leg up on making the CA correction sensor specific.

aspider72 said:

...maybe being suspicious I would say Nikon could fix it through but
it's all about marketing: (1) What a great job with JPGS in camera
processing!
(2) What a great software CaptureNX is!

Click to expand...

Hey, everybody agrees that Nikon has a horrible marketing dept, so how could these bozos dream up a great conspiracy like that? ;-)

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
Bridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/
'Experience: Discovering that a claw hammer will bend nails.
Epiphany: Discovering that a claw hammer is two tools...'

Thanks, will try it out then.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8230549@N08/

I've noticed the same thing. Never had a problem with my D70 at all, sometimes on the D300 it's so bad I can't get rid of it in camera raw!

PS- I should mention it's not a problem in studio with fast shutter speeds and small aperture, seems to just happen with slow shutter/wide open.....

What you claim doesn't add up. The same lenses should show the same CA unless you're using software like NX that has auto correction for Nikon lenses. CA is a function of the lens, not of the camera. Yes, the D300 has a little more detail to make CA slightly more apparent, but you should see CA with your other cameras if the processing is equivalent.

Are you correctly diagnosing CA? Are you sure you're not seeing purple fringe - that's a sensor artifact and it doesn't have the same bicolor artifact that's diagnostic of CA.

I get some purple fringing with the D300 associated with bright lights.

--
BJN

If we were talking about film this would be correct, but I don't think it is for digital.

The different sensors microlenses handels light that is not perpendicular different.
So there might very well be a differnce between bodies with CA.

Regrads
Jorgen