• 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 100 / Fuji 45-100/4 and 110/2 bottle bokeh

Fuji 45-100/4 and 110/2 bottle bokeh

February 24, 2020 JimK Leave a Comment

I’m hoping the title made the oenophiles reading this blog chuckle a bit.

In the last post, I took a technical look at the out-of-focus performance of the Fujifilm 45-100 mm f/4 lens, and found it substantially inferior to that of the Fuji 110 mm f/2. Do these differences carry over into real-world shooting? This post takes a look at that. I photographed three wine bottles, which is a usual way for me to look at both the bokeh around the plane of focus and that well away from it.

First, I’ll show you full-frame images, downsampled to web resolution.

110/2 at f/2

 

110/2 at f/2.8

 

45-100 at 100mm. f/4

 

110/2 at f/4

The camera position was the same for the two lenses, yet it appears that the focal length difference is greater than the putative 10%. Perhaps the entrance pupil of the 45-100 at 100 mm is further from the subject than that of the 110? One of the effects of this is to make the out-of-focus areas of the 110 shot blurrier/creamier, than the zoom images. The 45-100 bokeh looks edgier, but that is at least partially because of the differences in out-of-focus blur.

45-100 at 100mm. f/5.6

 

110/2 at f/5.6

 

45-100 at 100mm. f/8

 

110/2 at f/8

 

Now we’ll look at some crops at about 70% magnification, to see how the lenses handle the transition from in-focus to out-of-focus. At this point, I should mention that the Lightroom sharpening was amount 20, radius 1, detail 0.

110/2 at f/2

 

110/2 at f/2.8

 

45-100 at 100mm. f/4

 

110/2 at f/4

 

45-100 at 100mm. f/5.6

 

110/2 at f/5.6

 

45-100 at 100mm. f/8

 

110/2 at f/8

I’ll let you draw your own conclusions. I’m not real happy with this test. I will measure the relative focal lengths of the two lenses and see if there’s some way to make the playing field more level for a comparison.

 

 

 

 

 

GFX 100, GFX 50S

← Fuji 45-100/4 bokeh and out-of-focus performance Fuji 45-100/4 focal length changes with distance →

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Your email address will not be published.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

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.