Re: PESO" New Year's Day Walkaround

[Paul Stenquist]

I had the *istD set on center spot autofocus, so I fixed the focus on 
the critter, then reframed the shot. I'm not sure that this phenomena 
should be described as CA either. Every long lens I've ever used 
produces some strange bokeh with extremely out of focus branches 
against a bright sky. I don't find it objectionable. In fact, I find it 
quite interesting.
Paul
On Jan 2, 2005, at 10:36 AM, John Whittingham wrote:

It's probably chromatic aberration. It's most evident in this kind
of shot, where the background is extremely bright. I corrected it
somewhat in the RAW conversion, but couldn't eliminate it
completely. I think even my A 400/5.6 would show some CA with this
kind of background and minimal depth of field.
I'm not entirely sure it's CA the minimal depth of field seems more the
culprit but obviously unavoidable at 320mm. It would be interesting to 
know
just exactly where the camera chose to focus or was the shot manually 
focused?

Would it be better with a film camera?!
John

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 10:02:13 -0500
Subject: Re: PESO" New Year's Day Walkaround
It's probably chromatic aberration. It's most evident in this kind
of shot, where the background is extremely bright. I corrected it
somewhat in the RAW conversion, but couldn't eliminate it
completely. I think even my A 400/5.6 would show some CA with this
kind of background and minimal depth of field.
On Jan 2, 2005, at 8:58 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Paul, I took another look at the pic ... meant to ask about the 
purple
fringing.  Is that chromatic aberration or something else.  It really
makes
the lens far less useful ...

Shel
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3000223&size=lg

------- End of Original Message -------