• 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 / Fujifilm GF lenses hotspotting at 720 nm

Fujifilm GF lenses hotspotting at 720 nm

April 8, 2021 JimK 15 Comments

I keep being asked which Fuji GF lenses hotspot and which don’t. I tested on a GFX 50R modified by LifePixel to respond to wavelengths longer than 720 nm. Here’s a table I made from the results:

OK means no hotspotting, or very little. H means hotspotting that I consider to be unacceptable. I threw the Coastal Optical 60 mm f/4 UV-VIS-IR into the mix. All lenses were tested with subjects tens of meters away. The second row is the f-stop.

 

GFX 100, GFX 100S, GFX 50S

← Smallrig GFX 100S L-bracket Shutter shock in the GFX 100s →

Comments

  1. Josh Himes says

    April 8, 2021 at 7:02 pm

    Thanks for compiling this chart Jim! I can add that at 850nm the 120 has the same level of excellent hotspot performance as the 45 and 250. If there is a specific test you are doing, let me know and I can send you a few samples for evaluation.

    Reply
  2. Gene K says

    April 9, 2021 at 10:32 am

    Jim:

    Could you define what you mean by hotspotting.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      April 9, 2021 at 12:23 pm

      https://kolarivision.com/the-science-of-infrared-hotspots/

      Reply
  3. Jason K says

    April 25, 2021 at 9:55 pm

    Have you considered a more technical approach to quantifying hotspot tests? I find trying to shoot into foliage or a wall like many do to be a pretty poor method- you really need a strong Ir source in bottom frame and then something empty and clear in the middle- like clear sky in order to see more subtle contrast issues.

    Or to quantify it this is the best testing method anyone has come up with as a system so far: https://www.edwardnoble.com/hotspot-info

    https://www.edwardnoble.com/hotspots

    I have replicated this test myself with a similar lamp and testing scale since I can’t trust any other hotspot lists or people.

    I’ve lost count of how many times some list or person has sworn lenses don’t have hotspots only to buy them and find they’re terrible (the lifepixel list, kolari list, countless blogs and forums). It seems few really knows how to stress test lenses and find the more subtle hotspot issues, but they can ruin photos.

    I would be interested in moving to Fuji for IR, but lenses do not seem promising. It’s also interesting that fuji releases an IR GFX camera, but doesn’t look like they have put any special thought into IR lens performance for it.

    Reply
  4. Phil Lindsay says

    April 30, 2021 at 10:02 am

    My testing shows that the both the Fuji 45-100 and 100-200 Zooms perform well (no hot spots) in with 680 and 720 nm IR filtration on the 50S. Unfortunately the 32-64 Zoom does not do so well beyond f/8. The 100-200 Zoom is also good with 850 and 950nm filtrationPhil

    Reply
    • Irven says

      February 25, 2022 at 7:29 pm

      Thank you for the thumbs up on the GF 100-200. Can’t wait to use it on my soon to be converted GFX 50R.

      Reply
  5. Josh Himes says

    May 3, 2021 at 9:03 pm

    Hi Jim,

    Just curious if you have had time to test the GF 80 on your IR converted camera yet?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      May 3, 2021 at 9:08 pm

      I haven’t tried it, but I will.

      Reply
  6. Josh Himes says

    May 3, 2021 at 9:22 pm

    Thanks in advance. I am hopeful that it will be a good performer in IR.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      May 4, 2021 at 9:00 am

      Tested. It works fine. There is some measurable hotspotting, but nothing that would be objectionable unless you’re really pushing it. I’ve updated the table.

      Reply
  7. Josh Himes says

    May 4, 2021 at 12:14 pm

    That’s good news! Thanks for testing!

    Reply
  8. MARK SILVER says

    February 19, 2022 at 9:30 pm

    How confident are you that the GF 45-100 performing well?
    I just acquired the 45-100, and am considering selling my 45 mm prime since I have the new lens.
    Thanks

    Reply
    • JimK says

      February 20, 2022 at 6:30 am

      My copy appears to be excellent.

      Reply
  9. Rob Shea says

    April 2, 2022 at 7:21 pm

    Has anyone tried the GF35-70mm in IR?

    Reply
  10. Dan Kennedy says

    July 16, 2024 at 5:14 pm

    Hi Jim,

    To add the 500mm has no hotspot even at f/22, I did not bother to test further.

    The 55/1.7 has a very visible hotspot from f/2.8 onwards, bad candidate for IR.

    Cheers

    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

  • 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
  • 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.