• 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 / On shift, pitch, yaw, and sharpness

On shift, pitch, yaw, and sharpness

November 21, 2024 JimK Leave a Comment

Earlier, I posted some examples of images made in two ways:

  • Using the shift function of the GF 30/5.6 T/S lens with the sensor parallel to the target.
  • Using no shifting, yawing the camera to put the target in the same place in the image, and using Photoshop in postproduction to make it seem as if the target had been photographs from straight on.

The relative results depended on f-stop. Sharpness at f/8 was about the same. Sharpness at f/5.6 was better in the non-shifted, Ps-manipulated image.

In this post, I’d like to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each approach more generally.

The most obvious advantages of using shift is more accurate framing. What you see is what you get. It’s hard to predict what the framing will look like if you just pitch or yaw the camera and plan on correcting in post.

The most obvious advantage of using pitch or yaw is that you are using the center of the lens’ image circle more, and therefore there will be less sharpness lost than if you used more of the periphery of the lens’ image circle as would have been the case had you shifted.

To a first approximation, with a rectilinear lens and a rectilinear final image, there will be the same amount of stretching of the subject. If the shift or pitch is upwards, that stretching will be most apparent at the top of the frame. It follows that, if sharpness is limited by the lens itself rather than the sampling performed by the sensor, that the paragraph above this one implies that the result might be sharper if you tilt or yaw than if you shift. To a first approximation, sharpness will be about the same in both cases if the lens sharpness is diffraction limited, as would be the case with the GF 30/5.6 T/S lens stopped down to f/11 or narrower. As we’ve seen above, for that lens, sharpness is about the same at f/8.

However, at wide apertures, it is more likely that the periphery of the lens image circle is softer than more central parts of the projected image, and thus avoiding that part of the image circle can produce a sharper result, as we saw with the GF 30 T/S lens at f/5.6.

If part of the image sharpness is limited by the sampling frequency of the sensor, then shifting has an advantage in that part of the image, since pitch or yaw would require resampling that part of the image at a higher spatial frequency than was used for the capture.

 

 

 

GFX 100S

← Fujifilm 30mm f/5.6 T/S lens — sharpness, shift vs postproduction Fujifilm 30mm f/5.6 T/S lens — sharpness, shift vs post, extreme right →

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.