the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / GFX 50S / Fuji 250/4 AF-S, AF-C static accuracy

Fuji 250/4 AF-S, AF-C static accuracy

June 15, 2018 By JimK Leave a Comment

This is a continuation of a series of posts on the Fuji GFX 50S.   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 50S”. This is the fourth post in a series on the Fuji 250 mm f/4 lens for the GFX.

In this post, I looked at the focus shift of the FujiFilm 250 mm f/4 G-mount lens and found it small.

Now I’ll report on using a similar technique to measure the accuracy of the AF-S and AF-C modes of the camera when focused on a static target 5 meters away. Here’s the target:

I selected a focus area the size of the low-contrast target to the left of the ramp and positioned it over that target. I made 16 exposures at each stop in 1/3 stop increments from f/4 through f/11. Exposures were about 1/100 second at ISO 100 wide open and got longer from there. I used the electronic shutter and a  Fuji remote release. I waited for focus confirmation before pressing the release button all the way down.

Here is the luminance focus error:

The thick lines are the average shifts, and thin ones mark the values one standard deviation away from the average. The shift in the object field (in front of the tens) is towards the camera as the lens is stopped down. You can see that things go swimmingly until f/9, when the scatter increases dramatically.

Converting that to the size of the circle of confusion (CoC) that would be implied by that amount of focus error:

Let’s take a look at each of the three Adobe RGB (I used JPEG for this testing) color planes, and at the individual samples:

At f/4.5, there was one set of outlier points. At f/9 through f/11, there were two clusters of focused distances.

In AF-C mode:

There’s no funny business at the narrow f-stops, but the spreads are wider than with AF-C. We’ve seen this before.

In terms of the CoC:

Since the pixel pitch of the camera is about 5.3 micrometers, this is pretty darned good focusing.

Let’s look at the color planes and samples:

 

 

There appear to be two clusters at f/5 through f/7.

This a good performance, but the clustering is a bit strange.

← Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 OOF PSFs Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 OOF PSFs — part 2 →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

January 2021
S M T W T F S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
« Dec    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • 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 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

  • Anthony New on Camera resolution and 4K viewing — summary
  • Ilya Zakharevich on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • JimK on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • JimK on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • CarVac on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • JimK on Detectability of visual signals below the noise
  • JimK on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • Bill Claff on Detectability of visual signals below the noise
  • Mike B on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • Robert Frangioso on Leica 280/4 Apo-Telyt R on GFX 50R in infrared

Archives

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.