Purple Fringing with 85/1.8D on D90

[TCav]

Originally Posted by GSFinlay

The D90 does correct CA, same as the D300. But only with JPegs. It cannot be turned on - or off. Shooting NEFs will require VeiwNX (release 1.4.1) or Capture NX to take this out of the raw files.

I can't find anything about this feature anywhere. You're not talking about the RETOUCH MENU are you?

Originally Posted by GSFinlay

This looks at LOT worse than the worse case I have ever seen from my 16-18 3.5-5.6 VR.

Shooting at f/2.0 probably has a lot to do with that. But stopping down means too many compromises elsewhere.

[JimC]

Originally Posted by TCav

I shoot JPEG continuous. I'm already slowing things down with the High ISO NR option. At ISO 800, I can get away without NR, but above that, the noise is apparent in OOF wood grain and solid panels. Above 1400, it shows up in fur. I turned on High ISO NR and it looks good up to 1600 (the highest ISO I've seen so far.)

I'd try it in raw with a fast card and see how it does in shorter bursts so that you're not filling up the buffer faster than it's writing it to the card.

The D90 applies a bit of noise reduction to raw files from what I've seen from analysis of the files by some very smart people. See my posts in this thread for links to opinions about it:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/ge...fin#post994872

But, it does a pretty good job at higher ISO speeds and any remaining noise is still easily correctable in software. Try Nikon NX2 (it's NR algorithms are pretty good) for starters, and also give Bibble Pro with Noise Ninja a try (including trying the optional Noise Ninja plug-in).

[TCav]

Originally Posted by rjseeney

... Also, TC, welcome to the dark side

In Sony's Digital Darkroom discussion forums, I posted a thread entitled I've turned to the Dark Side

[JohnG]

Originally Posted by TCav

In Sony's Digital Darkroom discussion forums, I posted a thread entitled I've turned to the Dark Side

You realize, as a new member of the Dark Side, you'll have to stop saying positive things about Canon now, right?

As to the purple fringing - I'll be interested to see if it's a pattern or not. I recall asking some professional sports photographers about it and one of my lenses. I was surprised to hear them say, even with their 300mm and 400mm 2.8 lenses it's still a problem in certain situations. So, the point is - that while some lenses may be more prone to it than others, even the best lenses on the market still have a problem with it in certain situations. It will be interesting to see whether this is a rare or regular issue. Keep us posted.

[TCav]

Originally Posted by JohnG

You realize, as a new member of the Dark Side, you'll have to stop saying positive things about Canon now, right?

Yeah, that's a condition of the warranty, and was made clear to me during the initiation ritual.

Originally Posted by JohnG

As to the purple fringing - I'll be interested to see if it's a pattern or not. I recall asking some professional sports photographers about it and one of my lenses. I was surprised to hear them say, even with their 300mm and 400mm 2.8 lenses it's still a problem in certain situations. So, the point is - that while some lenses may be more prone to it than others, even the best lenses on the market still have a problem with it in certain situations. It will be interesting to see whether this is a rare or regular issue. Keep us posted.

It only happens when illuminated by sunlight (direct or indirect), not when under the sodium vapor lights (not mercury vapor lights like I said in my initial post.) (Of course, sodium vapor lights don't have a lot of violet and UV anyway.) I don't like the idea of applying some negative exposure compensation, but I don't like the alternatives either. I'm using center-weighted metering, and have upped the area from 8mm to 10mm (A neat little tweak all by itself. Thank you Nikon.) which might help keep the saddle pads from overexposing.

I don't want to switch to matrix metering because wherever I shoot, there's an open door not far away. I'm also loath to shoot RAW, not only because it will slow down continuous shooting, but for the time to post process. I shoot hundreds of photos at a time. I'm preparing to shoot a Dressage clinic next Tuesday and Wednesday, and my wife has already told everyone that I bought a new camera for the ocassion. I will definately end up with thousands of images to sift through. I can't do that in RAW for several reasons.

[TCav]

My wife was looking at the photos I took of her riding yesterday.

She announced that she doesn't like my new camera.

It shows her wrinkles.

I'm not sure how I feel about that.

[Coax]

Wecome to my world!
My Bread and Butter is shooting Dressage on a weekly basis both indoors and out.(I find myself begging to shoot outside most of the time).You are going to find,That you are continuously Shooting high Contrast(Dark horses,w/White,shiney Tack in crappy lighting).And you don't dare use a Flash! unless you want a 1800# crazed animal in your lap....You have the right lens,you will find that RAW is the only way to go since you cant control the lighting, you have to control it in Post Production.Its the only way I've found to get the job done....And yes, PS is present in alot of my shots I just have to fix it later.....

[Coax]

Oh Yeah, Welcome to the World of the Horse Crazed!!!

[TCav]

I've been shooting Dressage for a while, but never indoors because I never had the gear for it.

[Coax]

Very Cool,
My undereducated theory about the fringing follows pretty closely with jims.The camera is trying to guess the best exposure/focus on the brightest spot and then you have it against black boots and dark brown,chestnut color and it almost always overexposes the white pads and breeches etc.Its maddening for sure....And the reason the sun makes it worse? Full spectrum light reflecting off of the pad.Whereas sodium light is more towards the red end..Talk about redcast!!!!!!