• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / Lens screening testing / Examples / Good 63 mm MF lens

Good 63 mm MF lens

On this page, I’ll walk you through a test of a Fuji 63mm lens on a Fujifilm GFX 50S body. The lens turns out to be properly assembled.

We want to test the lens wide open. We consult the minimum distance chart:

With a 63 mm lens, we need to be about 43 meters at f/2.8.

Checking for target size:

A 16 inch star will be about 100 pixels on the sensor at the minimum distance. 150 is better, so I used a 22.5 inch Siemens Star for my target.

I backed up 48 meters, and underexposed to make sure the target background didn’t clip. 

In the center, magnified three or four times:

Center

There is a lot of aliasing and false color, indicating good focusing. I used my GFX magnified peaking technique, and as usual, it worked like a charm. I did make a couple of series that were focused with peaking turned off. They were, at least by comparison, awful. If we consider the images in opposite pairs we can look for differences that aren’t radially symmetric. If sufficiently bad, these departures from symmetry are indicators of improper assembly. 

Upper Left

 

Lower Right

 

These are quite a bit less contrasty than the center. The lower right is sharper, although both are sharp enough to show aliasing.

Top

 

Bottom

The bottom is sharper than the top. 

Upper Right

 

Lower Left

 

These are about the same, with the top actually being slightly sharper.

 

Far Right

 

Far Left

The right is slightly sharper than the left.

There is not a pattern here that makes me think that there’s an alignment error worth worrying about, and we’ve got enough sharpness to cause aliasing even with the softest crops, so I’m calling this a good lens.

F/2.8 is not the 63 mm Fuji’s sharpest stop. Let’s runs through a series at f/4.

Center

 

Upper Left

 

Lower Right

 

Top

 

Bottom

 

Upper Right

 

Lower Left

 

Far Right

 

Far Left

 

The differences are smaller. Based on this and a few other tests, my conclusion is that you should test lenses for assembly errors wide open if you can, even if they’re not the sharpest these. I suppose there are some lenses that are so soft wide open that that’s not going to be the best plan, but based on a few good lenses, it seems to be the way to go.

 

 

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.