• 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 / X2D / 38 XCD on X2D, 45 GF on GFX 100S, foliage, center crops

38 XCD on X2D, 45 GF on GFX 100S, foliage, center crops

September 29, 2022 JimK Leave a Comment

This is the 9th in a series of posts on the Hasselblad X2D 100C camera and the XCD lenses. You will be able to find all the posts in this series by looking at the righthand column on this page and finding the Category “X2D”.

In my previous quantitative testing, I found the Hasselblad XCD 38mm f/2.5 to be nicely sharp on axis. I didn’t have an easy way to do and apples to apples comparison of those results to the ones I’d done earlier for the GF 45mm f/2.8 on the GFX 100S. In this post I’ll do a real-world comparison with distant foliage on a still California morning as the subject.

If you want me to cut to the chase, there is little difference between these setups on axis. If you  jump to the next post, you can see that there are some differences at the edge of the long direction of the sensors. 

I set up the cameras as follows:

  • RRS 4-series Versa legs
  • Arca-Swiss C1
  • 2-second self timer
  • ES
  • Base ISO
  • AF-S for five shots, picking the best sharpness in post; this calibrates out field curvature
  • f/2.8, f/4,  f/5.6, f/8, f/11
  • Manual shutter speed selection, 1/1000, 1/500, 1/250. 1/125. 1/60
  • Subject distant 100 meters

 

I developed the images in Lightroom with

  • White balance set to Daylight
  • Adobe Standard Profile
  • Sharpening: amount 0, radius 0, detail 0
  • Color noise reduction set to 0.
  • All others settings at default.
  • Minus 2/3 stop Exposure move on the GFX images.

Here’s the scene at f/2.8:

Hasselblad, Center, f/2.8

 

Fuji, Center, f/2.8

Center crops magnified to about 250%. If that’s too much for you, back up from your screen.

Hasselblad, Center, f/2.8

 

Fuji, Center, f/2.8

Not much to choose between these.

Hasselblad, Center, f/4

 

Fuji, Center, f/4

They are both a little sharper. They are still about the same, except for color and contrast differences.

Hasselblad, Center, f/5.6

 

Fuji, Center, f/5.6

 

Still not much difference.

Hasselblad, Center, f/8

 

Fuji, Center, f/8

Diffraction is softening both images.

Hasselblad, Center, f/11

 

Fuji, Center, f/11

The diffraction softening gets worse.

 

 

 

X2D

← Otus 55/1.4 on X2D 100C, GFX 100S, MTF50 38 XCD on X2D, 45 GF on GFX 100S, foliage, edge crops →

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.