• 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 / GFX 50S and GFX 50R fake ISOs

GFX 50S and GFX 50R fake ISOs

July 21, 2019 JimK 6 Comments

This is one in a series of posts on the Fujifilm GFX 50S and 50R. 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”.

I had an interesting email exchange this morning with someone who reviews cameras for a living. He’d mentioned routinely making his GFX 50x captures at ISO 50 so that he could maximize the dynamic range. I told him that wouldn’t help because ISO 50 on the GFX 50x is what I’ve been calling a “fake ISO”; it doesn’t allow the accumulation of more electrons in the well, but merely does the same thing as what you’d do when you set the ISO to 100 and set the Exposure Compensation to + 1 EV.

I’ve talked extensively about fake ISOs  on this blog. You can search for the term, or you can read a detailed explanation here. However, I’d never tested the GFX 50x cameras at ISO 50; I’d just looked at Bill Claff’s data and saw that they worked like the other cameras with which I was familiar, and moved on. But here was a person of some repute who said otherwise, so it would behoove me to verify Bill’s results.

I took a GFX 50R, attached a 45 mm f/2.8 Fuji lens, put it on the slick new Arca Swiss cube with geared panning, and aimed it at a scene with the shutter speed manually set to 1/100 second and the f-stop manually set at f/5.6. I fired off two shots, one at ISO 100 and one at what Fuji calls 50L — nice touch, that L, which should be a clue that not all is as it seems.

Here’s a full-frame histogram of the raw file from the ISO 100 shot:

 

And here’s the histo of the ISO 50 shot:

They are essentially identical, proving that the camera is not less sensitive in ISO 50 mode than at ISO 100. Of course, the JPEG preview image in the ISO 50 shot is darker than the one in the ISO 100 shot, but the raw values are the same.

So, no, Virginia, there is no way to gather more photons at ISO 50 than at ISO 100 with the GFX 50R. Presumably the GFX 50S works the same way. Bill’s tests indicate that it does.

 

 

GFX 50S

← Zeiss Batis 135 on Nikon Z7 GFX 100 EDR →

Comments

  1. David Berryrieser says

    July 21, 2019 at 11:52 am

    I’ve long been mystified why Arca-Swiss didn’t have geared panning on their Cube and D4 heads. It seems like the easiest rotation axis to put gears on. I’m glad to see they are finally getting around to it.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      July 21, 2019 at 11:57 am

      And they got to bump the price by half a kilobuck.

      Reply
  2. Rico Pfirstinger says

    July 22, 2019 at 9:16 am

    Hi Jim,

    yes, the 50S works the same way of course. So do all Fujifilm X series cameras in Extended ISO L mode.

    This is quite weird in X cameras that offer more than one ISO L setting. For example, an X-T2 with base ISO 200 also offers ISO L 160, ISO L 125 and ISO L 100. One would expect that ISO L 160 has the same DR as ISO 200. However, ISO L 160 is derived from ISO 320. And it’s the same with ISO L 125, which is in fact derived from ISO 250.

    So, by switching from ISO 200 to ISO L 160 in manual mode M (and not changing aperture or shutter speed), you are actually losing 2/3 EV of dynamic range. And ISO L 125 still takes away 1/3 EV of DR. ISO L 100 then of course has the same DR as ISO 200.

    A remarkable problem with extended ISO L in Fuji cameras is that the live view doesn’t represent the actual DR of the fake extended ISO setting. Instead, it will behave like an actual lower ISO setting, so the live view and live histogram aren’t displaying correct image previews. Everything looks fine in the EVF and in the histogram, but the result (RAW and JPEG) is overexposed by 1 EV (high risk of blown highlights).

    Of course, this can be circumvented by manually setting the exposure with the camera’s actual base ISO and then switching to ISO L. This will darken the viewfinder by 1 EV, which can be nice and useful in low-contrast scenarios where you are aiming for a classic ETTR exposure with highlights at the sensor saturation point. In these situations, it often also helps getting auto white-balance.

    Reply
  3. CarVac says

    July 22, 2019 at 10:03 pm

    A related topic is how the Sigma fp will do in-camera stacking for its rather extreme extended-low-ISO capabilities, and how this will affect the shortest exposure time what with the electronic-only shutter.

    Reply
  4. Billy says

    August 17, 2019 at 2:03 am

    Not relevant to this topic ,but i have seen some tests shot on GFX between a GF and a Canon lens adapted to the Fuji .Same settings ,same focal lengths in a controlled studio scene.The results showed that the GF lens underxposed the image.It would be interested if you could do something similar .

    Reply
    • JimK says

      August 17, 2019 at 6:49 am

      Sorry, there are no Canon lenses available to me.

      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

  • 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
  • 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.