Reading mode: Light Dark

Later serial # F828 - minimal or no PF

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lin Evans
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
L

Lin Evans

Guest
My serial # 13309XX F828 doesn't appear to have issues of any significance with purple fringing, in fact I'm having difficulty producing it at all. I finally made a small amount happen by intentionally overexposing a highly reflective aluminum wheel in bright sunlight, but even then it was minimal.

In photographing tree limbs against a bright, blue sky, there is absolutely minimal evidence that I can find of PF. There is the normal small amount of classic red/green CA, but it's no more than on many more of my digicams and less than most.

Below are links to a couple of the original fine jpg's at a little over 3 megapixels each for anyone interested:

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
--
http://208.56.82.71
 
Lin Evans said:
http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
Click to expand...
These shots are not typical of the conditions in which people have been experiencing and noticing CA.

It seems to be worst at wide apertures and wide focal lengths. You're stopping down a good bit and shooting at full tele.

Also, the composition is masking what CA is present. It's harder to noice fringing in a blue and white scene.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
Ron Parr said:
Lin Evans said:
http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
Click to expand...
These shots are not typical of the conditions in which people have
been experiencing and noticing CA.

It seems to be worst at wide apertures and wide focal lengths.
You're stopping down a good bit and shooting at full tele.
Click to expand...
Actually, these are letting the camera decide the settings in the "P" mode, so any aperture differences are auto related.
Member said:
Also, the composition is masking what CA is present. It's harder
to noice fringing in a blue and white scene.
Click to expand...
On numerous other samples posted there are strong PF fringing on the underside of tree limbs in quite similar framing so I'm doubtful if the framing itself is an issue. I have the same limbs shot in full wide angle and the results are about the same.

If you look closely at the upper left quadrant, limbs have some evidence of PF on the under side, but not nearly to the extent as in other images. I'll see if I can find some which I used as a sample for CA shift earlier as examples.

:om
--
http://208.56.82.71
 
Lin Evans said:
Member said:
It seems to be worst at wide apertures and wide focal lengths.
You're stopping down a good bit and shooting at full tele.
Click to expand...
Actually, these are letting the camera decide the settings in the
"P" mode, so any aperture differences are auto related.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter how you got there.
Member said:
Member said:
Also, the composition is masking what CA is present. It's harder
to noice fringing in a blue and white scene.
Click to expand...
On numerous other samples posted there are strong PF fringing on
the underside of tree limbs in quite similar framing so I'm
doubtful if the framing itself is an issue. I have the same limbs
shot in full wide angle and the results are about the same.
Click to expand...
The ones I remember had very overexposed white skys and dark branches, which makes any CA much more noticeable.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
Though I am huge 828 fan now I can tell you where the PF is very noticeable; printed circuit boards! I'm around commercial electronics all the time (we build custom high-end electronics) and have taken many pictures of circuit boards that have numerous solder joints on them. This is one situation where PF REALLY stands out. In fact, it's the only time I have had a problem with it. For the record, my 300D is almost as bad in that situation as any digicam would be.

Regards,
Chuck
 
you have very strong PF all over the picture, especially in dsc09895.jpg
just look.
 
Within the first 10 pictures I took I noticed an abnormal amount of PF/CA. I even took the same picture with my S400 and it had "0" CA/PF.

Mac
Lin Evans said:
My serial # 13309XX F828 doesn't appear to have issues of any
significance with purple fringing, in fact I'm having difficulty
producing it at all. I finally made a small amount happen by
intentionally overexposing a highly reflective aluminum wheel in
bright sunlight, but even then it was minimal.

In photographing tree limbs against a bright, blue sky, there is
absolutely minimal evidence that I can find of PF. There is the
normal small amount of classic red/green CA, but it's no more than
on many more of my digicams and less than most.

Below are links to a couple of the original fine jpg's at a little
over 3 megapixels each for anyone interested:

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
--
http://208.56.82.71
Click to expand...
 
Mac,

I see it in your first post pic, but that's small by digicam standards. My 300D and my other all-in-ones have at least that much. I'll try and post one of my circuit board shots - then you'll see PF. I made an 11x14 print of a shot similar to yours last week and I couldn't see any PF from my 828 or 300D (in the print). You can if you zoom in, but I would expect that. Anyway, I personally feel it's not even an issue in the huge majority of my pics. I am more concerned with the high-ISO noise, but I work around it. That's the only image quality area in my opinion where my 300D image is superior - 828 has better color and better detail. Anyway, I find the whole PF thing interesting if highly overblown.

Chuck
Chris MacClellan said:
Mac
Lin Evans said:
My serial # 13309XX F828 doesn't appear to have issues of any
significance with purple fringing, in fact I'm having difficulty
producing it at all. I finally made a small amount happen by
intentionally overexposing a highly reflective aluminum wheel in
bright sunlight, but even then it was minimal.

In photographing tree limbs against a bright, blue sky, there is
absolutely minimal evidence that I can find of PF. There is the
normal small amount of classic red/green CA, but it's no more than
on many more of my digicams and less than most.

Below are links to a couple of the original fine jpg's at a little
over 3 megapixels each for anyone interested:

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
--
http://208.56.82.71
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Lin Evans said:
My serial # 13309XX F828 doesn't appear to have issues of any
significance with purple fringing,
Click to expand...
It reminds me a birch tree, except that in my part of the world the branches of such a tree do not exhibit a violet/purple cast as especially evident in your second pic.

We all know that the beauty is in the eyes of beholder.

Seriously, you stopped your lens to f5.6, a wise thing to do if you want to minimise CF. The vocal denouncers of CF in this forum posted pics taken with F2.0-f2.8

Cheers

alexeig
 
Chuck I didn't post any pictures of the 828 as of yet??? I will shortly.

Mac
Chuck Fralick said:
I see it in your first post pic, but that's small by digicam
standards. My 300D and my other all-in-ones have at least that
much. I'll try and post one of my circuit board shots - then you'll
see PF. I made an 11x14 print of a shot similar to yours last week
and I couldn't see any PF from my 828 or 300D (in the print). You
can if you zoom in, but I would expect that. Anyway, I personally
feel it's not even an issue in the huge majority of my pics. I am
more concerned with the high-ISO noise, but I work around it.
That's the only image quality area in my opinion where my 300D
image is superior - 828 has better color and better detail. Anyway,
I find the whole PF thing interesting if highly overblown.

Chuck
Chris MacClellan said:
Mac
Lin Evans said:
My serial # 13309XX F828 doesn't appear to have issues of any
significance with purple fringing, in fact I'm having difficulty
producing it at all. I finally made a small amount happen by
intentionally overexposing a highly reflective aluminum wheel in
bright sunlight, but even then it was minimal.

In photographing tree limbs against a bright, blue sky, there is
absolutely minimal evidence that I can find of PF. There is the
normal small amount of classic red/green CA, but it's no more than
on many more of my digicams and less than most.

Below are links to a couple of the original fine jpg's at a little
over 3 megapixels each for anyone interested:

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
--
http://208.56.82.71
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
http://public.fotki.com/cmacclel/f828/
Chris MacClellan said:
Mac
Chuck Fralick said:
I see it in your first post pic, but that's small by digicam
standards. My 300D and my other all-in-ones have at least that
much. I'll try and post one of my circuit board shots - then you'll
see PF. I made an 11x14 print of a shot similar to yours last week
and I couldn't see any PF from my 828 or 300D (in the print). You
can if you zoom in, but I would expect that. Anyway, I personally
feel it's not even an issue in the huge majority of my pics. I am
more concerned with the high-ISO noise, but I work around it.
That's the only image quality area in my opinion where my 300D
image is superior - 828 has better color and better detail. Anyway,
I find the whole PF thing interesting if highly overblown.

Chuck
Chris MacClellan said:
Mac
Lin Evans said:
My serial # 13309XX F828 doesn't appear to have issues of any
significance with purple fringing, in fact I'm having difficulty
producing it at all. I finally made a small amount happen by
intentionally overexposing a highly reflective aluminum wheel in
bright sunlight, but even then it was minimal.

In photographing tree limbs against a bright, blue sky, there is
absolutely minimal evidence that I can find of PF. There is the
normal small amount of classic red/green CA, but it's no more than
on many more of my digicams and less than most.

Below are links to a couple of the original fine jpg's at a little
over 3 megapixels each for anyone interested:

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
--
http://208.56.82.71
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
If you want some PF, take a look at these ceiling shots at Fry's Electronics:

http://snorlax.lampi.org/mike/digicamparison.html

The top shots are cropped from the original photos, which are available from links at the bottom of the page.

There are some comparative photos taken with a Minolta A1 for reference from the same spot.

The photos are taken using auto settings, full wide angle and full telephoto.

Very little PF in the Minolta at either end of the range, and quite a bit less in the Sony at the telephoto end.

--Michael Lampi
 
brn68 said:
you have very strong PF all over the picture, especially in
dsc09895.jpg
just look.
Click to expand...
I've looked very carefully, and if this is what you call "very strong PF" we will not come to any agreement about the definition of either "PF" or "very strong."

The amount of PF in this image is quite low compared to samples of what "most" photographers would consider "strong" PF.

Below are samples of what I would consider "very strong PF," so if you actually believe that my samples and these samples are both "very strong" PF, I've nothing more to discuss with you.









--
http://208.56.82.71
 
those pics are loaded with purple
Lin Evans said:
My serial # 13309XX F828 doesn't appear to have issues of any
significance with purple fringing, in fact I'm having difficulty
producing it at all. I finally made a small amount happen by
intentionally overexposing a highly reflective aluminum wheel in
bright sunlight, but even then it was minimal.

In photographing tree limbs against a bright, blue sky, there is
absolutely minimal evidence that I can find of PF. There is the
normal small amount of classic red/green CA, but it's no more than
on many more of my digicams and less than most.

Below are links to a couple of the original fine jpg's at a little
over 3 megapixels each for anyone interested:

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09893.jpg

http://www.lin-evans.com/f828/dsc09895.jpg
--
http://208.56.82.71
Click to expand...
 
Member said:
In photographing tree limbs against a bright, blue sky, there is
absolutely minimal evidence that I can find of PF. There is the
normal small amount of classic red/green CA, but it's no more than
on many more of my digicams and less than most.
Click to expand...
Please try again against a lighter sky (more contrast). Unfortunately the sky is a very light grey in Japan at this time of the year (not every day) so many of my shots are not coming out as good as yours.

Of course in other conditions the camera is perfect.

--
Andrew Mullan
F828 CA Samples
http://www.veganjapan.org/ca.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top