• 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 GFX 100 light-field pattern noise

Fuji GFX 100 light-field pattern noise

August 4, 2019 JimK Leave a Comment

This is one in a series of posts on the Fujifilm GFX 100. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “GFX 100”.

The GFX 100 is the first GFX camera to have on-sensor phase-detection autofocus (OSPDAF). The previous two GFX cameras used contrast-detection autofocus (CDF) exclusively. I have observed in both Sony and Nikon mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras (MILCs), that OSPDAF introduces artifacts into the captured image, and more PDAF rows make for more and more visually-objectionable artifacts. In the case of the Sony MILCs, the artifacts are referred to as PDAF striping, and occur as light horizontal (if the camera is in landscape orientation) stripes at more-or-less regular spacing. The stripes are only a visual problem under some lighting conditions. I have never seen them in the absence of lens flare, and they don’t always occur even if lens flare is present. They usually are not an issue in images with little post-production, but big moves there can make them visible, and when they are, they are ugly.

The Nikon Z6 and Z7 don’t have PDAF striping because they have processed the images in camera to remove it. But their fix introduces what I think is a bigger problem. It’s called PDAF banding, and shows itself as regularly-spaced dark stripes in the shadows if the raw file is subjected to moderate shadow pushing. It’ too, doesn’t occur under all conditions, but only when the camera decides it needs to ameliorate PDAF striping.

How about the GFX 100? Will we see anything similar to the Sony and Nikon MILCs? This post is my first hard look at that.

In order to average out photon noise, I made 128 exposed to the right exposures of a white card with the GFX 100 and the Fuji 110 mm f/2 lens. The ISO was 100, I used 14-bit raw precision, and the shutter was set to electronic (ES). I averaged all 128 images, and looked at the spectra of all four raw planes. Here’s the first green plane:

fs is the camera’s sampling frequency (two over the pixel pitch, which is 3.76 micrometers (um). It’s not one over the pixel pitch because each raw plane samples at twice the total pitch). Ignore the gradual tail on the left; that is due to unevenness in the lighting. Note the spikes. There is a horizontal-direction spike at 1/3 the sampling frequency, or every 6 pixels in the mosaiced raw file. That spike indicated vertically-oriented artifacts. There are vertical-direction spikes at a bit under 1/2 fs, 1/3 fs, a bit under 1/4 fs, and 1/9 fs. The last one indicates a horizontally-oriented artifact ever 18 rows in the mosaiced raw file.

Here are the rest of the raw channels:

The blue channel has hardly any periodic artifacts.

 

Both the red and second green channels have a lot of periodic energy.

What does this look like? I made histogram-equalized crops of the averaged images to show the artifacts more clearly.

G1

 

B

 

R

 

G2

How will this affect real-world photography? It’s too soon to tell, but now we know what to look for.

 

GFX 100

← Fuji GFX 100 photon transfer curves Fuji GFX 100 dark-field pattern noise →

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 Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.