• 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 / GFX 100 / Fuji 30 mm f/3.5 screening test

Fuji 30 mm f/3.5 screening test

July 23, 2020 JimK Leave a Comment

The Fujifilm 30 mm f/3.5 lens plugs a big hole in the G-mount prime lens stable, sitting as it does between the 23 mm and 45 mm lenses. In terms of landscape mode vertical angle of view, it’s the equivalent of a 22 mm f/2.5 lens. It has been anticipated eagerly by the GFX community, and started shipping this week. My copy arrived today, and I wasted no time setting up my lens screening test.

Here’s the scene, with a low-contrast Siemens star target:

Test conditions:

  • GFX 50S
  • Target distance: 27 meters
  • F/3.5
  • 1/4000 second
  • ISO 100
  • Arca Swiss C1 on RRS legs
  • Manual focusing
  • 5 sets of images (I usually do three, and you’ll see why I increased that in a minute)
  • 9 exposures per set, with the target in the center, all four corners, top and bottom vcenter, and left and right center.
  • Picked the image set with the sharpest image with the target in the center (they were all about the same)
  • Developed in LrC
  • Adobe Color Profile
  • Sharpness set to 20, radius 1, detail 0
  • White balanced to grey target background

The results, at 200% magnification:

The order of shooting was:

  • Center
  • Center left
  • Center right
  • Top Left
  • Top center
  • Top right
  • Bottom left
  • Bottom center
  • Bottom right

Why is that important? Because I noticed that, when I returned the camera to the place that put the target in the center at the end of the test, I noticed that it was no longer in focus. That’s why I did two extra sets of images. You will notice that the bottom row is soft. That could point to a lens problem, or it could be an indication of the camera not holding focus properly. I’ve seen that before with GFX lenses occasionally, but never to such an extent as we see here, if indeed that is what’s going on.

I did another set, making three exposures at each of the 9 target locations using AF-S, and picking the best of each:

Now we see that the bottom row is at least as good as the top one. So the issue in the first set of 9 captures was either tilt or focus instability.

I did some more testing specifically to test the stability of the focus position and saw no instability. I did some more testing, and the lens appeared to be tilted slightly down in front of the camera compared to how it should be. This is the right direction for making landscapes.

The obvious question at this point is: is the lens tilted, or is it the body? This body has passed tilt tests in the past, but something might have changed. So I ran another test with a different body, this time a GFX 50R.

Using the same exposure order I used before, which was middle row, top row, bottom row:

Bottom row last

Now the lens looks good.

Changing the order to middle row, bottom row, top row:

Bottom row second

Now the bottom row looks a little better than with the other shooting order. Here’s an important fact. I sharted checked for focus instability at the end of each series by recentering the target and using magnification and focus peaking. It was sometimes off at the end. So there is focus instability. I threw those away. I’ll have to go back and test the GFX 50S doing the same thing, but in any event, I now know I have a good lens.

I haven’t seen any evidence of focus instability with this lens if the camera is not moved between exposures. So I think that focus instability is more of a problem for camera and lens testers that for real-world photographers. Still, it is good to know that it happens sometimes, and it appears to happen more with this lens than with the others I’ve tested.

Here’s a another test with the GFX 50S, with row order middle, bottom, top, and checking at the end to make sure focus hasn’t shifted.

Second go-round, GFX 50S

The bottom row is a tad softer, indicating that the camera’s lens mount and or the sensor is misaligned slightly. But it’s not as soft as in the first test, indicating that there was also a little focus shift in the first test.

GFX 100, GFX 50S

← Fuji GFX auto focus bracketing step size Fuji 30 mm f/3.5, 32-64 mm f/4, GFX 50S, Siemens Star →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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.