Purple fringing with Panasonic lenses on Olympus bodies

Well,panasonic camera needs 2 data from panasonic lenses carry two file which are chromatic aberration and distortion data to process.

But Olympus camera only need 1 data from Olympus lenses which is distortion only.

So if you put vise versa mix match between panasonic Olympus it will be One file missing and one file not needed.

That's why very to suggest using same brand lenses into same camera body

Thanks

The purple fringing that is typically complained about is often caused by longitudinal chromatic aberration. This aberration cannot be corrected automatically in software. Lateral chromatic aberration is different and it is typically corrected in software in MFT cameras.

Longitudinal chromatic aberration is generally most noticeable in longer focal length lenses when used at or near full aperture (unlike lateral CA, which occurs equally at all apertures). It occurs across the whole frame (unlike lateral CA, which does not occur in the centre of the frame and is most apparent in the corners). Longitudinal CA is often most apparent in parts of the image that are somewhat out-of-focus.

As others have said, high-contrast edges such as dark twigs against a bright white background often show it most clearly.

Edit: A better link explaining the chromatic aberrations is this .

Chris renato wrote:

Well,panasonic camera needs 2 data from panasonic lenses carry two file which are chromatic aberration and distortion data to process.

But Olympus camera only need 1 data from Olympus lenses which is distortion only.

So if you put vise versa mix match between panasonic Olympus it will be One file missing and one file not needed.

That's why very to suggest using same brand lenses into same camera body

Thanks

To follow up, Oly cameras beginning with TruPic VII incorporate both correction parameters from Panny lenses and apply them to files the same as any Panny camera. TruPic VI and earlier only incorporate distortion correction.

The longitudinal CA as described above isn't addressed and calls for defringing in post, which luckily has become quite effective for my needs. Fast lenses seem most susceptible and while I don't have the 15, the Oly 75/1.8 throws it with strongly backlit fine detail.

I'd be remiss to not also mention purple flare common to certain Panny lens-Oly camera combinations, which is a different issue altogether. IIUC Oly addresses near-UV in the lens and Panny addresses it in the camera. Not owning the Lumix 7-14 I've not encountered it; although it's supposedly not the only lens with the issue it's the most infamous.

Cheers,

Rick

I just picked up the 15 1.7 to use with my e-m1 ii. I took a couple hundred photos testing it out in various situations. Purple fringing appears to be a non-issue with the exception of astrophotography where it’s significant. Bummer as it has an entirely adequate fov for such. I was unable to adequately correct it in LR.

In day time shooting I could only find one example of it (in a 100+ shots) along a bright white sailboat mast when shot wide open. At f4 it was gone.

my neighbors white Xmas lights also exhibit it at night but....stopping down quickly minimized it. At f2.2 it was much reduced and by f3.2 I really had to hunt to find any trace of it.

May have to experiment with a Tiffen 2A filter for Astro, though the conventional wisdom is that an uncoated filter like the 2a will result in all kinds of reflections at night. Anyone try it?

Michael Meissner wrote:

There are old threads about purple flare with certain Panasonic lenses on Olympus bodies:

• http://alanwatsonforster.org/writing/mft-purple.html

I just picked up a Panasonic-Leica DG Summilux 15mm f/1.7 (along with my existing Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 mark I) that are said to cause fringing. Now I don't recall any fringing recently with the 20mm.

The conventional wisdom seems to be it is not an issue with the Olympus cameras starting with the E-m1 mark I that use the TruePic VIII processor for Olympus JPEG output. My current main 3 cameras are the Olympus E-m1 mark I, Olympus E-m10 mark II, and Panasonic G85. In theory, I should be fine.

I have older cameras (E-m5 mark I, E-pm2, and E-P2) that have TruePic VI. So I thought I might do a little test to satisfy myself that it is not an issue with the new cameras, but it shows the problem with the older cameras. Are there types of photos that tend to show the purple fringing? Harsh light with strong light/dark components maybe?

I really would prefer not to have to track down a Tiffen 52/58mm UV 2A filter and the appropriate step rings, etc. to prevent purple fringing.

Note, I only shoot JPG, so I'm mostly concerned about the automatic removal of the fringing.

Purple flare and purple fringing are two different things. The purple flare as most famous with the Pana 7-14, is fixed via a 2A gel at the back in the filter holder from a Pana fisheye 8mm. I did this and purple flare is gone. The purple flare issue is more of a problem than colour fringing.

Purple fringing is fixed (usually partially) via firmware as you say from Truepic VII used in EM1.1.  A 2A filter does almost nothing to fix this... and the Tiffens are not coated and cause awful reflections... I had to send mine back for a refund.

A RAW processor with lens profiles and a "purple fringing" fix like DXO Photolab fixes all colour fringing even better than the Truepic JPG. Over aggressive purple fringing fixing causes halos on the edges of subject matter.

An EM5.1 JPG might show more colour fringing with a Pana lens than if on an EM1. I have not heard of particularly horrible combinations and they would be a JPG problem. Basically, do not worry too much as long as you have a competent RAW processor. Some lenses (I think the 100-300 Pana) might show quite bright purple edges on high contrast bright edges at 300mm even on Pana bodies JPG.