Originally posted by clackers Plenty of CA.
Technically, what your image shows is "Bokeh CA", not CA (in the technical sense of the latter term).
(Longitudinal) CA is defined as the chromatic aberration in the focus plane, i.e., it describes the level of colour fringing for objects in the focus plane caused by the failure of all colours to be focused on exactly the same plane. (Lateral CA is the failure to focus all colours with the same magnification, but we can ignore this type of aberration for now.)
The greenish and purplish discolouration we see on focus charts or on out of focus twigs is caused by colours not converging on out of focus objects. A good name for this particular aberration is "Bokeh CA" or rather "Toneh CA".
Originally posted by clackers Guess what, here's the Pentax DFA*50, that DPR maligned but didn't actually measure. Why, it's *less* than one pixel.
Well, here you may see an example of why the difference between (Lo)CA and Bokeh-CA can matter.
A lens may measure extremely well for actual LoCA but may show distinct colouration in out of focus areas.
I'm not saying the HD D-FA* 50/1.4 is an example for that.
I'm also not trying to defend DPReview. Most of the time, when reviewing Pentax equipment, they don't know what they are doing, mess up something critical, and blow up any tiny issue to the size of Olympus Mons (Everest won't do it when it comes to Pentax). So no, I'm not giving DPReview any pass.
Just pointing out that it can pay off to be precise about the difference between in-focus CA (that's what "Longitudinal CA" and "Lateral CA" refer to), and "Bokeh-CA".