• 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 50S / Focus shift, LoCA, focus stability of Fuji 23/4 on GFX

Focus shift, LoCA, focus stability of Fuji 23/4 on GFX

June 30, 2017 JimK 6 Comments

This is the 63rd in a series of posts on the Fujifilm GFX-50S. The series starts here.

I measure focus shift and longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) in lenses in the following way.

I mount the camera to a Cognisys computer-driven focusing rail. I set the controller up to use 160 mm of travel and make 101 exposures 1.6 mm apart. I set the assembly a distance from the target so that 160 mm of travel gives me both sides of the peak sharpness with some room to spare and make a set of images at each whole f-stop in the range of interest. I use Adobe DNG converter and dcraw to get the mosaiced raw images.  Using a Matlab program  that I have modified greatly from one that Jack Hogan wrote, I call MTF Mapper to find the MTF50 for a horizontal slanted edge, and plot the results  in cycles per picture height vs distance from the point furthest away from the target.

  • GFX 50S
  • 23mm f/4 Fuji lens
  • ISO 100
  • Manual exposure
  • Wescott LED panels set to 5500 K.
  • EFCS
  • Manual focus, set at one position in the center of the rail
  • Cognisys computer-driven focusing rail
  • 101 exposures 1.6 mm  apart
  • Target distance at the center of the rial, 80 cm.

I would have liked to have been further away, but with a lens this short and rail travel limited, this is about the best I could do. I used a low-contrast slanted edge target printed with an inkjet printer on semi-gloss paper. It’s not as sharp as the razor blade that I usually use, but I needed to use a target bigger than the razor blade at more usual subject distances, and don’t want to make things confusing by having more than one target for the same lens tests. Because I’m using a low-contrast, not-wonderfully-sharp target, and I am so close to it, you can’t compare the numbers here with the numbers that I showed  you in the tests of the 120 macro and the 63/2.8. The 23 is a very sharp lens, even if these numbers aren’t that impressive.

 

Here are the results for each f stop in the range from f/4 through f/11:

The horizontal axis is relative subject distance in cm. Far distances are on the left, and close ones on the right.  The vertical axis is MTF50 in cycles/picture height. You can see that maximum sharpness — the highest point on the curve — is not obtained at the same subject distance for all three planes. That’s LoCA. I did not smooth the curves. With one exception, which I’ll get to at the end of this post, you are looking at plots of the data just as they came out of MTF Mapper.

 

At f/5.6, the depth of field (DOF) is not enough to cover up the LoCA.

At f/8, the LoCA is going to be mostly masked by the DOF.

 

At f/11, you’re not going to see any LoCA.

If we plot the green channel curves above on the same graph, we can look at focus shift:

It’s not bad at all. You’ll be perfectly fine focusing this lens wide open and saving yourself a button push on the GFX.

Now is when it gets ugly.

Remember that I said above that there was one exception to the data being un-manipulated? Here is the unmodified data for the f/4 LoCA curves:

What’s that jump in the middle? The lens shifted focus, even though no one was touching the camera or the lens. It moved the focus back (further away from the camera) 19 steps. I repositioned the earliest data and dropped the duplicates. This is not the first time I have seen the Fuji GFX focus by wire lenses spontaneously change where they are focused with no provocation. It is not something a tester likes to see. It is also not something a photographer likes to see. I hope that Fuji fixes this.

 

GFX 50S

← Fuji 23/4 on GFX, Nikon 14-24/2.8 on D810 AF accuracy of Fuji 23/4 on GFX →

Comments

  1. Jack Hogan says

    July 1, 2017 at 1:32 am

    Interesting Jim. Do you think that the heavy rippling in MTF50 results is also due to the focus-by-wire setup?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      July 1, 2017 at 8:10 am

      I don’t think so, Jack. It it were so, then the three raw channels would be strongly correlated.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      July 1, 2017 at 9:21 pm

      Jack, I’ve just compiled the data for the 110/2, where I could use the razor blade target, and it is very smooth and there is little noise. I think the low-contrast target is what is causing the noise in these curves.

      Reply
  2. ZM says

    July 1, 2017 at 6:53 am

    Hi Jim, a off-topic question: does your blog provide rss subscription?

    Regards,

    ZM

    Reply
    • JimK says

      July 1, 2017 at 8:17 am

      Yes, it does. You can use any RSS feed reader. I’m just using the out-of-the-box WordPress features, though. There used to be a WordPress-standard RSS widget that you could add to sidebars, but that’s no longer available. There are other ways to do that, but I haven’t gotten around to implementing — or even understanding — any of them.

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Fujifilm GFX 50S: Fujinon GF 23mm f4 R LM WR, Macro and More | Fuji Addict says:
    July 2, 2017 at 8:38 am

    […] The Last Word – Focus shift, LoCA, focus stability of Fuji 23/4 on GFX […]

    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

  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • 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

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.