• 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 IBIS efficacy with the Fuji 110/2

GFX 100 IBIS efficacy with the Fuji 110/2

August 17, 2019 JimK 2 Comments

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 been using the IBIS in the GFX 100 from time to time, but until this morning, I’d not gotten around to quantitative testing. Part of the reason is that I hate to perform this test, which I usually do in AF-S mode, taking time between each exposure to carefully compose, think calm thoughts, breath out, hold the camera in the Pete Souza position with my right foot at right angles to the target, and behaving as closely as I can in the way I imagine a sniper shooter or biathlete does. In order to get a statistically valid sample, I need to do that over and over, taking breaks from time to time if I start to get dizzy.

In hopes of reducing the pain, I have modified my regime. For this test, I used AF-C, and continuous-low drive mode, and held the shutter release down as I exposed each series of 16 or so images for each test condition. I couldn’t use the whole Souza grip for fear of touching the focusing ring, so I resorted to the left hand supporting the camera and the near end of the lens barrel approach. I expect that absolutely better numbers could be obtained with my previous method, but I think the relative results will be substantially the same.

In the interests of saving time, I also told the camera to make super-fine JPEGs instead of raws. I left the standard GFX 100 in-camera sharpening on. This produced mild overshoot on the slanted edge target, and made the modulation transfer functions at 50% (MTF50) higher than they would have otherwise have been.

Here’s what a typical shot looked like to the camera:

I kept the ISO setting constant at 400, and the f-stop at f/5.6. I used a Heliopan variable neutral density filter to vary the shutter speed between about 1/250 second and 1/15 second. At each shutter speed, I made about 16 exposures.

Here’s a typical sharp crop (shown here at about 200%) as sent to the slanted edge analysis program:

 

Want to see a blurry crop? Glad to oblige:

I analysed the lower right horizontal slanted edge with Imatest. Here’s the MTF of a fairly sharp shot:

And here’s one that’s not so hot, but not terrible:

I looked at how the MFT50, which is my go-to proxy for sharpness, varied with shutter speed with the IBIS on and with it off.

Here are all the data points:

The vertical axis is MTF50 (the 50% contrast point of the modulation transfer function curve) in cycles per pixel. You’re probably not used to seeing this measure. I’ll show you a more familiar one next. But for now, just concentrate not on the numbers themselves, but that dots near the top of the graph are sharper. The horizontal axis is one over the shutter duration: 128 is 1/128 of a second. You can see that the no-IBIS situation is in general worse than the result using IBIS even at shutter speeds near 1/250 second.

Here are the takeaways from the above graph:

  • If you fire away for long enough, you can get sharpish images with or without the IBIS on
  • Turning the IBIS on greatly improves your chance of getting a sharp image starting at about 1/125 second and the improvement increases as the shutter speed drops.
  • IBIS even helps your odds of getting a sharp image at 1/250 second
  • There is not a huge change in the statistics for the IBIS case from 1/30 to 1/250 second.

Now I’ll convert the vertical axis to something you’re more used to seeing, MTF50 in cycles per picture height:

Those are some pretty big numbers! There are two reasons for that. The large number of pixels in the GFX 100 plays a part, but so does the sharpening introduced by the camera with its default JPEG settings.

Here is an analysis of the statistics of the above data set:

The vertical and horizontal axes are the same as the previous graph. The thick blue line is the mean (aka mu) of the IBIS samples. The thick red line is the mean of the non-IBIS samples.This quantifies the loss in mean sharpness as the shutter speed gets longer without IBIS, and shows that IBIS provides roughly a three-stop advantage for mean sharpness over non-IBIS usage. The difference is about the same — maybe a bit better — for mean minus one standard deviation. This is consistent with previous IBIS tests that I’ve performed.

No surprises here. All good.

 

GFX 100

← Some GFX 100 answers Aliasing with the Fuji 100-200/5.6 on the GFX 50R and GFX 100 →

Comments

  1. Erik Kaffehr says

    August 17, 2019 at 2:47 pm

    Thanks for your efforts!

    Reply
  2. David K. says

    August 20, 2019 at 5:39 pm

    Impressive testing, and shows that the image stabilizer is really quite impressive.

    Reply

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

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • 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

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.