• 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 100S / Fuji 80 mm f/1.7 on GFX 100S, Siemens star

Fuji 80 mm f/1.7 on GFX 100S, Siemens star

March 17, 2021 JimK 4 Comments

This is one in a series of posts on the Fujifilm GFX 100S. 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 100S”.

There is an embarrassment of riches chez Kasson this week. Not only do I have a just-released GFX 100S to test — and I’m really liking the camera — I’ve got the just-off-the-boat (figuratively, at least; I think they ship these things by air) 80 mm f/1.7 to test.

Because of the weather, I haven’t put the lens through my screening test; I’ll get to that. However, on cursory examination it appears to be a good copy. If there are problems with the screening test, I’ll edit this post.

I’m doing my first test with a Siemens Star target, at a distance of about 20 meters. Test conditions:

  • ISO 100
  • Manual exposure, varying the f-stops
  • Arca Swiss CA on RRS legs
  • 2-second self timer
  • Focusing at taking stop except where noted at the end of this post.
  • Developed in Lr 10.2 with default settings except for white balance.
  • White balanced to the lower right gray background of the Imatest Siemens star

 

The scene, inside where it’s dry:

Center f/1.7

Some center crops at various f-stops at about 125% magnification.

Center f/1.7

The lens is sharp enough to cause plenty of luminance aliasing, but there isn’t much false color. This is sometimes an indication of longitudinal color aberration (LoCA). It will take another test to pin this down. By the way, it would be surprising if a lens this fast didn’t have some LoCA wide open.

Center f/2.8

Now we’re picking up a fair amount of false color. This may be because the DOF is now sufficient to bring all three color planes into better focus at the same time.

Center f/4

F/4 looks very similar to f/2.8.

Center f/5.6

F/5.6 looks good, too.

Center f/8

We’re seeing a tiny bit of softening because diffraction is getting worse faster than the aberrations are decreasing.

In the upper right corner:

Corner f/1.7

For a portrait lens, this is impressive performance.

Corner f/2.8

There’s not that much improvement a stop and a third down from wide open.

Corner f/4

The corner is crisping up nicely.

Corner f/5.6

About the same

Corner f/8

Still about the same.

Now I’ll show you a quick and dirty test for focus shift. I focused in the first image at f/1.7, and stopped down without changing the focused distance.

Center focused at f/1.7, f/1.7

 

Center focused at f/1.7, f/2.8

 

Center focused at f/1.7, f/4

 

Center focused at f/1.7, f/5.6

 

Center focused at f/1.7, f/8

I am surprised at how little focus shift there is.

I’ll be doing more testing, but this appears to be an excellent lens from the results seen here. I’m sure it has its foibles — what lens doesn’t? — and I hope to track them down in the next few days.

By the way, in spite of my using the nonlinear focus by wire mode, the focusing ring is overly sensitive for critical work. This is the first G lens I’ve seen with this issue.

 

GFX 100S

← Fuji GFX 100S EDR vs shutter speed GFX 100S 16-bit dark-field histograms →

Comments

  1. Hood Ben-Eshak says

    March 18, 2021 at 3:31 am

    Thanks for this…You have the last word when it comes to this part of science. Were you a child prodigy? Just curious!

    Reply
  2. AHMED GENCAL says

    March 19, 2021 at 6:52 am

    Please compare it with 110mm at landscape distance.Please

    Reply
    • JimK says

      March 19, 2021 at 6:53 am

      At same distance or same field of view?

      Reply
      • Ilya Zakharevich says

        March 19, 2021 at 7:02 pm

        How would it matter — the Siemens star is scaling-invariant?

        I Join Ahmet’s request here (although from purely theoretical point of view). The only place you reported on 110 mm I saw is in
         https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100/iq4-150-gfx-100-a7riv-different-slices-off-the-same-sausage/
         — and it seems to show quite exceptional behavior

        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.