Canon 1D MkIV purple fringing - PLEASE HELP!!

I pre-ordered my 1D MkIV as soon as it was available in October of 2009 and after a year of shooting with it in the field in 2010, I've found it to have two major notable issues:

1. The way it handles highlights is horrible... It doesn't seem to retain detail NEARLY as well as my old MkIII did before completely blowing out portions of the image. It seems much more prone to blowing out highlights than the MkIII

2. Purple fringing is absolutely horrible!! Anything that's relatively bright trying to transition into anything dark shows really, REALLY bad fringing... I never used to have this problem with my MkIII (I still have it as a backup camera).

Does anybody else have these issues with their MkIV? Should I be contacting Canon over this? Is there perhaps something wrong with the lens I'm using?

I shoot only with L lenses. Examples below were all shot on the 85mm f1.2 lens, wide open. At a quick glance through my Lightroom catalog I actually haven't been able to find anything showing similar issues with the 24-70mm f2.8 L

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I would absolutely contact Canon about that.

"Hey listen, my camera is producing Nikon quality images"

:p

The 85 wide open has bad fringing... Compare with similiar lenses, then report back. The 85 is a WHOLE different beast than the 24-70, with crazy fringing wide open.

It is not the body as much as it is the lens...

And plus, those images are WAY blown out. Exposure is all off, that does not help.

Still though, that's pretty damn bad.

Invertalon, I'm not that far off on the exposures... Yes, I'm shooting high-key images, but WAY blown out?

See for yourself:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Invertalon wrote in post #10880534
And plus, those images are WAY blown out. Exposure is all off, that does not help.

The subjects' faces aren't blown out.

I agree though, it's the lens, not the body. The f/1.2 will do that...

lens not body.

So this is... NORMAL... for that lens at f1.2?...

tinycomet wrote in post #10880852
So this is... NORMAL... for that lens at f1.2?...

with a target of such high contrast...head against white sky....absolutely

It's the lens, not the body, about the purple fringing. As for loss of dynamic range, I have no clue.

what about the sheet of music?

tinycomet wrote in post #10880874
what about the sheet of music?

black against white. Doesn't get much more contrast than that my friend.

damn you responded too fast I was gonna ask about the specular highlight on the groom's head backed against the green foliage. I didn't think the contrast was so significant in that case to cause that much fringing

Purple fringing is a characteristic of trhe lens, not the camera. The fact that you don't see it on your other lenses points the finger to the 85mm lens. Overall, the samples you have provided are at least a full f stop too light. This just aggravates the phenominon with the 85mm lens.

That is horrible CA. But I've seen other complaints of the CA from the 85 F/1.2 so I'm not overly surprised.

F/2 or so wouldn't have ruined those shots.

tinycomet wrote in post #10880886
damn you responded too fast I was gonna ask about the specular highlight on the groom's head backed against the green foliage. I didn't think the contrast was so significant in that case to cause that much fringing

His head is white (bald head in the sun has a tendency to do that). The trees are dark green. Shall I proceed?