• 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 / GFX 100 eye detection AF accuracy — numbers and samples

GFX 100 eye detection AF accuracy — numbers and samples

August 16, 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”.

I’ve talked anecdotally about the GFX 100’s face detection feature, and now I’ll get quantitative.

Here’s the setup I use in general for these kinds of tests:

The checkerboard ramp allows a Matlab computer program that I wrote to calculate the focus distance. I usually use a simple target like the one you see above, or sometimes replace the easy-to-focus one with something a bit more difficult. But to properly test eye-detection AF, I need a three dimensional target. Here’s a camera’s-eye-view of the one I used for this test:

My subject is creepy, but she can hold still for a long time, never complains, and never blinks.

I used the 110 mm f/2 lens at a distance of 2 meters, with AFS-S, focus priority, and left eye detection turned on (the camera thinks in terms of subject rand and left instead of camera right and left). I shot at 1/3 stop increments from f/2 through f/5.6, ten shots at each f-stop, and analysed the statistics of the results in Matlab.

Here are the focal-plane errors measured at the sensor in micrometers (um):

 

Front focus in the object field is indicated with negative y-axis numbers. Back-focus is show with positive numbers. I’ve plotted results for all three Adobe RGB color planes in their respective colors. The fact that they’re right on top of each other from f/2.8 through f/5.6 is an indication of the superb longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) performance of this lens. Just as with the regular focusing modes, the camera does not adequately compensate for the focus shift caused by the 110/2’s spherical aberration near wide open. The heavy lines are the average of the 10 shots per f-stop, and the narrower lines are one standard deviation above and below the average. You can see the data for each exposure, too, it’s plotted as dots.

To get an idea of what this means to photographers, I’ll convert it to a metric for defocus blur. The metric I’ve chosen is the diameter of the defocus-induced circle of confusion (CoC) in micrometers:

Form f/2.8 on up, this is pretty darned good performance, although it might not be so for landscape work. About 68% of the shots will fall between the two onoe-standard deviation lines, and that means that they will have blur circles of about 2 pixel pitches or less.

Even the f/2 shots aren’t all that far off. I’ll show you some crops, magnified to about 150%, to give you a better idea.

This is one of the worst f/2 shots:

f/2 back-focused

And this is one of the best f/2 shots:

f/2 closer-focused

Neither one is really bad.

For comparison, here is a well-focused — on the middle of the iris — f/4 image:

f/4

By the way, the sharpening for all of the above was set to amount = 40, radius = 1, and detail = 25, which is the Lightroom default. That’s too sharp for general work, but makes it easier to see misfocusing.

I am impressed.

 

 

 

GFX 100

← On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S Some GFX 100 answers →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

June 2025
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  
« May    

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

  • Hakan Yesil on Fujifilm 20-35/4 GF distortion
  • JimK on More Than Exposure: Understanding Total Light on the Sensor
  • Brandon on Adobe Super Resolution
  • Brandon on A Modest Proposal
  • Jeffrey Horton on More Than Exposure: Understanding Total Light on the Sensor
  • JimK on A Modest Proposal
  • Brandon on A Modest Proposal
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Price and Performance: Hasselblad X vs. Fujifilm GFX
  • DC wedding photographer on A Modest Proposal
  • NiceDays on Do Raw Developers Use the Embedded JPEG as a Color Reference?

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.