• 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 / Hasselblad X2D, GFX 100S long-exposure noise, 4.75 stop pushes

Hasselblad X2D, GFX 100S long-exposure noise, 4.75 stop pushes

November 20, 2022 JimK 4 Comments

This is the 38th 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 the last post I looked at the shadow noise in long-exposure X2D images with a strong push. In this post, I’d like to compare X2D and GFX 100S images made under similar circumstances.

Some days I screw up these tests and have to throw everything out and start over. That happened when I performed my first set of tests for this post, which you won’t get to see. My problem was that I was using natural light, and over the period of the exposure the light changed, so that I couldn’t get apples to apples results. So I changed to this artificial-light setup:

The cameras were mounted to the Foba camera stand with an Arca Swiss C1 cube. The rest of the setup is as follows:

  • X2D with 38 mm f/2.5 XCD lens, ISO 64, shutter speed 17 minutes, about 10 feet from target
  • GFX 100S with 45 mm f/2.8 GF lens, ISO 100, shutter speed 15 minutes, about 12 feet from target
  • f/32
  • Breakthrough 10-stop neutral density filter.
  • 2 second self timer
  • Aputure 100 LED light, with diffuser

I developed the images in Lightroom,  and Phocus plus Lightroom.

In Lightroom only, I gave the images a 4.75 stop exposure push, white balanced to the second gray patch from the left on the Macbeth CC24, turned off sharpening and noise reduction. I used the Camera Standard profile for the X2D, and Adobe Color for the GFX 100S.

For the dual-development case, I used the Standard profile, gave a 2-stop exposure push in Phocus, white balanced to the second gray patch from the left on the Macbeth CC24, turned off everything but the basic processing and color corrections, exported as a TIFF, and gave it another 2.75 stops of exposure push in Lightroom.

100% crops follow.

 

GFX 100S
X2D, Lightroom development

 

X2D, Phocus development

 

 

GFX 100S

 

X2D, Lightroom development

 

X2D, Phocus development

 

Conclusions:

  • The GFX 100S images are slightly less noisy, which is what the earlier measurements showed.
  • With a less heavy-handed — but still aggressive — push than the 9-stop one I used earlier, the black point errors int he various raw developers are much less evident.
  • Both cameras do well with long exposures and 4.75 stop pushes with Phocus and Lightroom.

 

GFX 100S, X2D

← Hasselblad X2D long-exposure noise, 4 & 5 stop pushes Hasselblad X2D long exposures versus averaging →

Comments

  1. Barry Benowitz says

    November 20, 2022 at 2:32 pm

    The Hasselblad sensors were always slated towards highlights and highlights roll off glad to see they caught up with shadows. Now if the X2D only had a live histogram or better yet per channel raw live histogram it would be viable!

    Reply
    • JimK says

      November 20, 2022 at 3:01 pm

      The Hasselblad sensors were always slated towards highlights and highlights roll off

      The highlights do not roll off in the X2D raw files. They clip abruptly.

      Reply
      • barry says

        November 23, 2022 at 12:41 pm

        good to know guess ill keep my h6 1st 00

        Reply
        • JimK says

          November 23, 2022 at 1:03 pm

          You talking about the H6D 100C?

          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.