Some weird blurriness for EOS R6 Mark II with RF24-105 f/4

[daikekiller]

I bought my new canon R6Mark2 with RF24-105 f/4 from Japan recently and shoot my first set of photos. However, the blurriness of the out-of-focus area appears to be very weird. Here are some examples:

 

 

 

I know some of the subjects are out-of-focus, but the blurriness of those out-of-focus area is very weird to me. It looks like abnormal fringe/ghosting. I just want to know if it is normal or something wrong with my lens/camera.
I know someone might argue those photos are processed, yes, I used LRC to edit some colors, but even before editing, those fringe/ghosting are already there.
I saved as RAW, so not a compression problem.

[Peter]

Would you mind sharing the raw files? About the flower it looks like a result of chromatic aberration removal.

[jrhoffman75]

Following

[ebiggs1 · Accepted solution]

"...the blurriness of the out-of-focus area appears to be very weird."

I don't see anything in focus. You were likely too close.

[MPBACK · Accepted solution]

When I use a lens with a macro feature, occasionally I find that I have moved a little too close to my subject.  This blurriness looks a lot like what I got when I get too close to a subject.  Not sure if that's the case here.  I generally shoot at several apertures to compare sharpness usually starting with around an f8 to f16.  To me, it does not look like a lens issue, but that's just my observation.

[daikekiller]

I think you are right. I did some extra test today, please see the image attached:

 I think the reason is simply when I am too close to the subject, the depth of focus is too small, and those area became normally out-of-focus, not something about ghosting or artifacts. When I decreasing the aperture, the "weird" blurriness went back to normal. So, the "ghosting" is only the matter of out-of-focus, not some algorithm defects or lens defects.
It is my first time to shoot a macro feature, so a good way to learn. Now I know I should leave the aperture a little smaller for macro. Thank you!

[daikekiller]

yes, you are right. Please see my reply to MPBACK. Thank you for answering!

[ebiggs1]

The Canon RF24-105mm f/4 lens is not a true macro lens. That makes a huge difference.

[justadude]

In addition to the other replies, I noticed that Ernie correctly said that it was not a true macro, but nobody mentioned the closest focusing distance with this lens.  So for future reference next time you want to shoot something close, keep the following spec in mind...