Yet Another 85 f/1.8 CA thread. Fresh set of eyeballs and opinions needed!

I am wondering whether this is normal level of CA. My eye is not trained enough to detect LoCa having never encountered much CA/PF to distinguish it from CA.

I did try removing Chromatic Aberration in DPP but that didn't seem to help even a bit. I did play around with LR's HSL saturation, purple and some blue and got satisfactory results, but I'm afraid of images having those colors.

I could really use some analysis of the samples. I am aware that fast primes shot wide open in high contrast do this, but from the samples, is this a normal level? Some samples aren't as bad as the others.

All that said, I'm in love with this lens!!!

All crops 100%, all images clickable through to their full size and all images shot wide open on a crop body.

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/cwKJ8

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/vqR33

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/7UP1v

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/Jd4v8

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/LwuTS

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/e0UIk

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/B1Go9

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/zYpcu

More samples with 100% crops.

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/gWrDB

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/ozSpY

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/UWMLY

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/s4Mkn

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/0EMR3

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/28Y9a

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/pmLhm

IMAGE LINK: http://imgur.com/rfvYY

Interested to hear what people think. Mine does it to. I pull the purple and magenta saturation sliders back in LR and it goes away. This does cause a problem when the shots have those colors in them. It def. annoys me. But I'm poor and want an 85 prime.

Yeah well, atleast it's not as bad as an 85L right?

Those don't look so bad, considering the photos were taken in the worst possible conditions when you are looking for ca. My 85 1.8 had it, no worse than that. You just have to learn how to adjust for it. I 've heard the 85L is worse, but so far it actually seems to handle it better. I wouldn't worry about it. The mercedes emblem is probably the worst and it is becuase of the harsh lighting.

Typical. My exprience with the 85L was that the L lens was even worse at the same apertures. IMO this is not a good lens (both 85/1.8 and 85L) for CA in high contrast below f/2.8.

skater911: So I'm assuming there's no point in replacing this lens. Sounds like a standard thing across all 85 f/1.8s. I guess my answer is, this isn't very bad CA.

JeffreyG: I guess I'm just going to have to learn to live with it. Other than this minor niggle, it is an amazing amazing lens.

Oops, stupid me forgot to remove the cheapo Tiffen UV 0 filter that came with the lens. All pictures are with the cheapo filter on.

all clearly LoCA not LaCA

Looks normal and yes that is LoCA. Don't overexpose and it won't be as bad.

How can I tell LoCA from LaCA? I guess it's time to read up a bit. This is a good link: http://toothwalker.org​/optics/chromatic.html I get it.

Being LoCA probably explains why none of the Chromatic Aberration Tuner settings were making any difference.

I wouldn't get rid of it, but as many said try not to overexpose in these situtations. After time you will learn how to avoid it or at least minimize it.

Sorry had to do one more post to hit 500. yeah me.

skater911 wrote in post #13223360
Sorry had to do one more post to hit 500. yeah me.

LOL Congrats!

So are you guys suggesting that LoCA is also expected from this lens or is it only LaCA?

Would getting a better Multicoated filter reduces the effect of either CA?

Overexposed areas are susceptible to CA...you have to decide where to expose for detail and where to lower the exposure when CA conditions arise....