Charles Krebs wrote regarding Olympus MPLFL objectives:
My experience with them would cause me to believe that the effect seen on the initial "eye" image appears way too severe to be an axial chromatic error from this series of objectives ...
I have been very happy with this objective. The working distance is adequate. The sharpness is great. I get good results with most subjects photographed with this lens.
I think the red and green donuts are quite interesting. Since the out of focus artifacts don't end up in the final image the longitudinal chromatic aberration (if it is that...) does not appear to be a problem.
Many thanks for your input!
I did another experiment to see if I can better judge the location of the corneal surface of the fly's eye. I dabbed an eye with a magic marker to try to make a visible mark at the surface. I then examined the images in the stack to see if I can better gauge the cornea's surface relative to the spot picked by Zerene and the above/below bits. Bottom line is that Zerene does a fine job. The slice it picked to contribute to the final image of the ommatidia were the ones with the sharpest contrast of the marker boundary. If there is a difference in elevation of the surface and the stuff in the final image I would say that it is within the bounds of the depth of field of the optics.
crop from first frame with focus below marker blob at surface. Note area in upper right...
second frame with focus at surface (I think...)
third frame with focus above surface
Dmap result...
Keith