• 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 vs 110/2, Siemens star

Fuji 45-100/4 vs 110/2, Siemens star

February 27, 2020 JimK 2 Comments

I’ve tested the Fujifilm 45-100 mm f/4 against two other Fuji GFX zooms, the 32-64/4 and the 100-200/5.6. In this and the two posts after it, I’ll be comparing the lens to the Fuji 45/2.8, 63/2.8, and 110/2. I’m doing the 110/2 in this post, and testing it against the 45-100 at f/4, f/5.6 and f/8. I’ll be looking at center and corner sharpness using a 22-inch-diameter low-contrast Siemens star target that I printed for this test.

The scene, at f/4 with the 45-100:

45-100/4 at 100mm, center, f/4

Target distance was 14 meters.

Test conditions:

  • The heaviest RRS legs
  • Arca Swiss C1 head
  • ISO 100
  • Electronic shutter 1/10 at f/4, 1/5 at f/5.6, and 1/2.5 at f/8
  • 2-second self-timer
  • AF-S, medium spot size
  • 3 sets of shots at each test condition
  • Developed in Lightroom
  • Picked best shot of each test condition
  • Sharpening amount 20 radius 1, detail 0 (much less sharpening than the default)
  • Adobe Color profile
  • White balanced to grey background

We’ll look at some tight crops at about 130% magnification.

45-100/4 at 100mm, center, f/4

 

110/2, center, f/4

The 110 is substantially sharper.

45-100/4 at 100mm, center, f/5.6

 

110/2, center, f/5.6

Now the zoom is almost as sharp as the prime.

45-100/4 at 100mm, center, f/8

 

110/2, center, f/8

Again, there’s not much sharpness difference.

In the upper right corner:

45-100/4 at 100mm, corner, f/4

 

110/2, corner, f/4

About the same.

45-100/4 at 100mm, corner, f/5.6

 

110/2, corner, f/5.6

The 110 is somewhat better.

45-100/4 at 100mm, corner, f/8

 

110/2, corner, f/8

Not much difference.

 

 

GFX 100, GFX 50S

← Fuji 45-100/4 focal length vs distance Fuji 45-100/4 vs 63/2.8, Siemens star →

Comments

  1. Jerrad Johnson says

    February 27, 2020 at 6:57 pm

    Regarding the center images:

    It seems that the prime’s capture is less sharp at f/5.6 than it is at f/4.
    And that the zoom’s performance is opposite: more sharp at f/5.6 than it is at f/4.

    Thus, they so to speak ‘met in the middle.’

    Is this correct?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      February 27, 2020 at 8:14 pm

      Yes. Diffraction is the great leveler.

      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?
  • 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

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.