Canon 85mm f/1.8 Purple Fringing

I was manually focused on the right eye with the Ee-S screen to the best of my ability (no live view on 5D classic). ISO 100, there is a VERY bright picture window to the left of the subject. You can see the purple fringing on the top bar going across the glasses and a little bit on the nose-piece. At F4 it's practically gone. The framing is a little different because I wasn't using a tripod and I was going up & down the stairs to see the differences (my screen is kinda messed up).

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Wow those 100% crops really make it look brutal. It's not any worse than my nifty fifty and correcting it in PS isn't too hard.

You'll be glad to hear you haven't put me off this lens :P

The intention of this thread was not to put anyone off from this lens, but to determine if mine is within the magical, mystical, unknown, "factory tolerances".

Poe wrote in post #10301549
The intention of this thread was not to put anyone off from this lens, but to determine if mine is within the magical, mystical, unknown, "factory tolerances".

Unfortunate side affect then :P

IMO the 100% crops make it look worse than it is

christoph33r wrote in post #10303717
Unfortunate side affect then :P

IMO the 100% crops make it look worse than it is

this seems to be the nature of 100% crops. useful at times, but also overstate problems so that people are worried about minute amounts of grain or CA. On an 8x10 the CA from this lens would be unnoticeable except to someone looking for it. with any pp it wouldn't be visible at all.

Poe wrote in post #10295339
Here is an 18MP image resized to 1024 px on the long side. (Taken at f/1.8, 1/1000, ISO 400)

There is a slight blue/purple haloing if you look carefully.

Resized images don't show the effect as well as 100% crops, but my concern is prints. The fringing should show up on a large print (8 x 12 and greater)

This looks perfectly fine for me, also considering the price of this lens.
Looking at all the other crops you posted, diagnosis is the same I already described for this lens.
Your camera AF may be backfocusing enough to increase the purple fringing artifacts, but as far as the lens is concerned, I would not expect much better than this from a non-apochromatic lens at that price.
My 85L is non-apo too, it has a noticable amount of purple fringing, and I love it anyway

Note: this is very noticeable at this very low focus distance. Try also with normal subject distance !

christoph33r wrote in post #10300981
Wow those 100% crops really make it look brutal. It's not any worse than my nifty fifty and correcting it in PS isn't too hard.

You'll be glad to hear you haven't put me off this lens :P

well hopefully I haven't because this lens has excellent colour, sharpness and bokeh for the price.

Best value lens in the Canon lineup in my humble opinion. I think your lens if fine based on your non cropped images.

CheshireCat wrote in post #10304541
Note: this is very noticeable at this very low focus distance. Try also with normal subject distance !

What is a "normal" subject distance?

I think I have some photos that are in the 5-10 feet range for subject distance and I can still find PF. I'll have to take a look.

I never used my 85 because of the fringing. Not that it showed up in most situations, but when it did, it was very annoying and has ruined a few potentially good shots. Especially shooting film where it's impossible to "just photoshop it out". Stopping down isn't really an option either; who buys a fast lens only to shoot it at small apertures?

Poe wrote in post #10625429
What is a "normal" subject distance?

I think I have some photos that are in the 5-10 feet range for subject distance and I can still find PF. I'll have to take a look.

At 5-10 feet the PF should not be annoying, unless you are an extreme pixel-peeper .