Originally posted by Andi Lo I think the fringing is actually his aura
Also I find that the general public usually doesn't notice fringing at all, or at least they never bring it up, only us photographers (more like pixelpeepers) would complain about something like that.
Andi, there is some truth about you "general public" statement. As a newbie to digital, I never saw PF until someone pointed it out to me. Ignorance really is bliss!
But I have always been a bit disappointed with the amount of PF/CA on the FA 50. I don't mind it to much in the average shot really, but the "tender" family shots really do bug me. I have yet to read a definitive answer as to what it is about these FA lenses that makes them a little more prone to CA in contrasty condition. I do know that from my MF lens experience there are inexpensive russian lenses that seem to have no real PF/CA issues and my guess is they did not have the greatest lens designers or lens makers during the cold war.
Anyway I have mentioned my PF/CA issues with the FA in forums before and always get the "Pixel Peeper" comebacks. So I usually just stay out of the threads now...
But the
"It also manages to attach itself with greater frequency to pixel peepers, and with far less frequency to photographers."
Golly gee, I expect that kind of stuff in DPR, but here in the land of "peace, love and understanding"... ouch!
Last edited by Igilligan; 06-06-2009 at 09:47 AM.