Is this amount of CA normal on a 17-35 AFS?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Nikam, Jun 14, 2005.

  1. Here is a shot I took last weekend of an abandoned house using my brand new 17-35. On the bright aluminum sheets on the roof, I noticed a bit of CA. I've shown a crop taken in Photoshop at 100% (does this give a 100% crop :?: :?: - I'm pretty new at this! :) ).

    Is this amount of CA normal :?: :?: - (I just want to make sure my new lens meets the norm). I haven't invested in Nikon Capture yet but I may be tempted now since I understand that the new Version 4.3 has CA removal. There's not a lot there - just a tiny bit of blue on the bottom of the right hand panel and a tiny bit of red on the right side. On the original image a strip of about one to two at the most pixels is affected and I'm not sure if it would show in a print.


    Here is the crop:

    View attachment 10456
  2. GeneR

    GeneR Guest

    My 17-35 is CA free. Were you using a filter? If so, I'd try it without a filter and see if there is a difference.

  3. MontyDog


    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
  4. I'm headed to the eye doctor to see if I need a new perscription, because I don't see a single problem with your samples :shock:.
  5. Paul,

    Looking at yours I would say its probably normal too Although it was not too bright a day, the aluminum roof was close to high end of the histogram. Thanks for replying. I'll maybe do a bit of testing as you've suggested. I think what I'm really looking for here is an excuse to buy NC. :) :) I gather the latest version has CA removal.


    Funny you should mention it. I'm at work right now and on my LCD monitor here I can't see it either, but on my home monitor it does show up.

    I happened to pick that spot when I was sharpening at 100% and noticed it then, but its only a pixel or two - so I don't think its anything to get too excited about. As the lens is new to me, I thought I'd ask about it.

    Thanks, Dennis
  6. The lighting conditions that caused your lens to produce a little problem probably would have created a disaster for any other wide angle zoom. Click on this link, and scroll down to see Bjørn Rørslett's review of the 17-35.
  7. MontyDog


    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;