RF 15-35 chromatic aberration?

Hi,

Few days ago got 15-35 for EOS R.

Fantastic lens., but seems lens has excessive chromatic aberrations. Not sure if it's my copy or just by design.

15 mm 1/500 sec at f/5.0, ISO 800

Zoom

I don't have that lens, but a good test would be to see how well the lens profile in DPP, Photoshop/Lightroom, or SOOC jpeg minimizes the the CA. If you sill have a lot of CA remaining after applying the lens profile, you might want to contact Canon support.

vel wrote:

Hi,

Few days ago got 15-35 for EOS R.

Fantastic lens., but seems lens has excessive chromatic aberrations. Not sure if it's my copy or just by design.

15 mm 1/500 sec at f/5.0, ISO 800

Zoom

This looks like the worst scenario possible and most lenses would exhibit some fringing here. IMO, this looks ok.

vel wrote:

Hi,

Few days ago got 15-35 for EOS R.

Fantastic lens., but seems lens has excessive chromatic aberrations. Not sure if it's my copy or just by design.

I don't have this lens but that type of bluing is normal. I do see some CA elsewhere in the image but it appears to be in the bokeh or to the edges which is normal.

How does it perform at 35mm? According to The Digital Picture review the CA of this lens is well controlled but is most prominent at 15mm.

Obviously a zoom lens is going to have more CA than a prime lens typically.

Here is an image I took with my RF 28-70 L at f/5. You can see that at the plane of focus in the center it's really good but at the edges and in the bokeh there is some CA visible in this high contrast situation.

All in all I would say your lens is normal.

Lightroom does not have yet profile for that lens. I tried to manually remove CA in Lightroom, but it had marginal effect I expected this lens would have less aberrations without digital correction.

Did not test with other focal length yet. I have same kind of CA with 24-105,, but not that prominent like 15-35 at 15.

vel wrote:

Lightroom does not have yet profile for that lens. I tried to manually remove CA in Lightroom, but it had marginal effect I expected this lens would have less aberrations without digital correction.

With CA like this you have to do it manually.

I tried, it creates some artifacts if pushed to max. Sure some post process will help, but to defringe blue CA on bluish background is not easy.

Guess it is what it is. May be it will be addressed in the profile. Also have to be more cautious with light at 15-17 mm. Otherwise this is outstanding lens. Few pictures.

15 mm 1/60 sec at f/5.0 , ISO 100

15 mm 1/80 sec at f/2.8 , ISO 1,000

17 mm 1/640 sec at f/16 , ISO 1250

17 mm 1/60 sec at f/16 , ISO 125

15 mm 1/640 sec at f/3.5, ISO 1,000

21 mm 1/1250 sec at f/5.0 , ISO 1,000

vel wrote:

Lightroom does not have yet profile for that lens. I tried to manually remove CA in Lightroom, but it had marginal effect I expected this lens would have less aberrations without digital correction.

Did you try in DPP?

vel wrote:

Guess it is what it is. May be it will be addressed in the profile. Also have to be more cautious with light at 15-17 mm. Otherwise this is outstanding lens. Few pictures.

15 mm 1/60 sec at f/5.0 , ISO 100

15 mm 1/80 sec at f/2.8 , ISO 1,000

17 mm 1/640 sec at f/16 , ISO 1250

17 mm 1/60 sec at f/16 , ISO 125

15 mm 1/640 sec at f/3.5, ISO 1,000

21 mm 1/1250 sec at f/5.0 , ISO 1,000

Nice images , nothing to complain there IMO

No I did not try DPP, but I tried manual in ACR and Lightroom. Same result. I cannot remove bluish fringing on blue background. It creates blotches all over if pushed too much. It seems that on wide end better to step down aperture to keep it in focus for backlit scenarios. I don't see excessive CA at 17mm and longer.  I had Sigma 8-16 on 7D Mark II. Never had such problem, so that was kind of unexpected behavior for 15-35. I just not sure if should I try another lens.

Manual correction in LR .

vel wrote:

No I did not try DPP, but I tried manual in ACR and Lightroom. Same result. I cannot remove bluish fringing on blue background. It creates blotches all over if pushed too much. It seems that on wide end better to step down aperture to keep it in focus for backlit scenarios. I don't see excessive CA at 17mm and longer. I had Sigma 8-16 on 7D Mark II. Never had such problem, so that was kind of unexpected behavior for 15-35. I just not sure if should I try another lens.

Manual correction in LR .

Unfortunately the image is overexposed. When shooting these types of scenes I recommend using the highlight tone priority setting. I just leave it on all the time.

If the image was not overexposed you could select the sky only using a blend layer in Photoshop like this:

This is one shot from HDR triplet. Processed image is below. I shot in RAW, I guess  highlight priority does not affect image. I use FV mode, as default reset all and adjust T/A/ISO as needed while focusing. For exposure compensation I use lens ring. I found convenient to program right side of bar show/hide histogram and adjust compensation by left hand.

I was thinking about fixing it, but my point is not how to fix bad image, but what to do to avoid bad images. Including changing the lens, but I think in some conditions CA is unavoidable especially for ultra wide.   I can fix it in Photoshop, but it takes to much time. Anyway thanks for advice, from three images mask should be OK.

vel wrote:

No I did not try DPP, but I tried manual in ACR and Lightroom. Same result. I cannot remove bluish fringing on blue background. It creates blotches all over if pushed too much. It seems that on wide end better to step down aperture to keep it in focus for backlit scenarios. I don't see excessive CA at 17mm and longer. I had Sigma 8-16 on 7D Mark II. Never had such problem, so that was kind of unexpected behavior for 15-35. I just not sure if should I try another lens.

Just for fun, try the lens profile in DPP and see how well it reduces CA compared to your manual approach. It is works well, then you should be in good shape once Adobe releases a profile for your lens.

I am always amazed at how well Adobe's lens profiles work once they are finally released. For example: the RF 24-240, which is totally useless without a good lens profile.

I retested today in similar conditions and came to conclusion that CA is negligible and will be handled by profile or manual. When shooting in this conditions background should be in focus. Blur will increase CA. Today I had only nice purple CA that I manually removed Anyway I will try DPP later. Thanks.

vel wrote:

This is one shot from HDR triplet. Processed image is below. I shot in RAW, I guess highlight priority does not affect image. I use FV mode, as default reset all and adjust T/A/ISO as needed while focusing. For exposure compensation I use lens ring. I found convenient to program right side of bar show/hide histogram and adjust compensation by left hand.

I was thinking about fixing it, but my point is not how to fix bad image, but what to do to avoid bad images. Including changing the lens, but I think in some conditions CA is unavoidable especially for ultra wide. I can fix it in Photoshop, but it takes to much time. Anyway thanks for advice, from three images mask should be OK.

I have checked the highlight tone priority, it affects the image in RAW as well.

I tried profile in DPP. Much better then my manual result. I moved Digital lens optimizer to 100%. Thanks a lot. Hope to see it LR soon.

That's a bit questionable. https://www.dpmag.com/how-to/tip-of-the-week/using-highlight-tone-priority/   I try not to overexpose. But thanks for correcting me. I should try it on R.