help with photo

[michaelb]

Is that chromatic aberration at the top on this tree shot (the white fringing)? It was shot with the kit lens and a circular polarizer at 18mm, f/10, 1/20s, ISO 200, tripod. No PP yet.

Is this the result of my cheap lens, poor technique, the CP or a combination of factors? How do I avoid this in the future or is it unavoidable? Should I fix with PP? Or should I buy a 17-40L? :D

Thanks in advance for the help.

[repoman]

Is it just me or is that size too small to really tell?

Nice shot btw

[forno]

Is it just me or is that size too small to really tell?

Nice shot btw


^^what he said on both points:D

[toriaj]

Maybe you could post an enlarged crop of just the problem area.

[michaelb]

Maybe you could post an enlarged crop of just the problem area.

As you wish....

[michaelb]

Now I know there are many talented photographers on this forum who can easily tell me how ignorant I am and how to avoid this problem. :confused:

Where are you?

[LoveOfSelene]

To tell you the truth, I can't see any thing wrong with it.

[cdifoto]

The only thing I can see would be possible motion blur from a breeze, not stopped with 1/20th shutter speed.

EDIT: You're also seeing some of the results of diffraction...low IQ from stopping down too far. f/18 is overkill. Try f/8 or f/10 so you can get that SS up without raising the ISO.

[michaelb]

The only thing I can see would be possible motion blur from a breeze, not stopped with 1/20th shutter speed.

EDIT: You're also seeing some of the results of diffraction...low IQ from stopping down too far. f/18 is overkill. Try f/8 or f/10 so you can get that SS up without raising the ISO.

Thanks for the advice, but this was shot at f/10.

[michaelb]

To tell you the truth, I can't see any thing wrong with it.

Your making me feel better about it ;) , but seriously, you can't see the odd looking white fringe around the leaves/branches at very the top of the tree?

[ReF]

EDIT: You're also seeing some of the results of diffraction.




Thanks for the advice, but this was shot at f/10.

cdi, maybe you're not seeing the effects of diffraction, but rather of the kit lens :p . looks like most of the softness is coming from some movement. doesn't seem like fringing the way i usually see it. i see a faint whitish glow around the tree in the crop but i wonder how the leaves and branches can create motion blur, then hold still long enough to not come out being a total blur all within 1/20th of a second. can you shoot the same shot over, once with the cp and one without?

[cdifoto]

Ok I misread the EXIF as f/18. Tired I guess. Those leaves don't look perfectly still to me either...but it could also be kit lens not-so-yumminess. You cannot totally rule out motion blur since you don't know the weather conditions up there at ~60 feet. Either way I don't see any CA or Fringing.

I think you're obsessing Mike. The kit lens isn't made for those who pixel peep.

[michaelb]

cdi, maybe you're not seeing the effects of diffraction, but rather of the kit lens :p . looks like most of the softness is coming from some movement.?

Could be the lens, it's not a 17-40L :D .
I really don't think movement caused this.



can you shoot the same shot over, once with the cp and one without?

Not unless your holding out on your time machine invention. Here today, gone tomorrow.

[michaelb]

Ok I misread the EXIF as f/18. Tired I guess. Those leaves don't look perfectly still to me either...but it could also be kit lens not-so-yumminess. You cannot totally rule out motion blur since you don't know the weather conditions up there at ~60 feet. Either way I don't see any CA or Fringing.

I think you're obsessing Mike. The kit lens isn't made for those who pixel peep.

Thanks for your input, but I really don't think I'm obsessing with this one. The very top of the tree looks like it's leaves and branches are surrouned by a strange white glow against the blue sky - I think it's a combination of the IQ of the kit lens and the very contrasty colors produced by the CP.

I'm not one who normally views my photos at 100% (Almost everything looks bad with with the kit lens viewed at 100%!! I would just depress myself!!).

This photo looks odd to me even when viewed at a very small size.

Anyways, thanks again for your thoughts.

[NewTekBuzz]

michaelb..

I think the shot looks great, however, I too think the problem is the kit lens.

Tim

[24Peter]

Thanks for your input, but I really don't think I'm obsessing with this one. The very top of the tree looks like it's leaves and branches are surrouned by a strange white glow against the blue sky - I think it's a combination of the IQ of the kit lens and the very contrasty colors produced by the CP.

I'm not one who normally views my photos at 100% (Almost everything looks bad with with the kit lens viewed at 100%!! I would just depress myself!!).

This photo looks odd to me even when viewed at a very small size.

Anyways, thanks again for your thoughts.

Michael - my first thought when I saw the shot was (other than the horizon) "wow - another nice shot from Michael." I'm gonna side with the others and say enjoy the great photo. The fringing is barely noticeable and probably is as you deduced a combo of kit lens and polarizer. But (sorry I can't resist) "don't miss the forest for the trees" on this one. It's a beauty! ;)

[michaelb]

Michael - my first thought when I saw the shot was (other than the horizon) "wow - another nice shot from Michael." I'm gonna side with the others and say enjoy the great photo. The fringing is barely noticeable and probably is as you deduced a combo of kit lens and polarizer. But (sorry I can't resist) "don't miss the forest for the trees" on this one. It's a beauty! ;)

Thanks for your comments; I'll try to relax, maybe have a beer and just enjoy the shot :D