• 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 / Hasselblad HC 50-110/3.5-4.5 @ 50 & 110 mm on Fuji GFX

Hasselblad HC 50-110/3.5-4.5 @ 50 & 110 mm on Fuji GFX

April 3, 2017 JimK Leave a Comment

This is the 23nd in a series of posts on the Fujifilm GFX-50S. The series starts here.

Yesterday, we looked at how the Hasselblad 50-100 mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom do when set to 80 mm. The answer was well in the center, and fair in the corners until stopped down quite a lot. Tooday we’ll look at the same lens at the extremes of its focal length range.

Shutter set to EFCS.  Apertures from f/3.5 or f/4.5 to f/11 in whole stops except for the first step. I focused three times at each aperture, and picked the sharpest images.  2-second self-timer. Arca-Swiss C1 cube on RRS sticks. Focus was upper-center of the image. All images were refocused at each aperture. Daylight white balance selected in Lightroom.  

The scene, wide open at 50 mm:

 

Focus was in the upper center.

Focal point crops at 253% magnification:

f/3.5

This is pretty darned good for a zoom.

Here’s how to use these highly-magnified crops. The dimensions of the GFX sensor are 8256×6192 pixels. If we make a full-frame print from the GFX on a printer with 360 pixels per inch native driver-level resolution, like the Epson inkjet printers, we’ll end up with a 23×17 inch (58×44 cm) print. The 318×246 pixel crop you’re looking at will end up 0.8333×0.6833 inches (2.12×1.74 cm). Let’s imagine that you or your viewers are critical, and will look at the 22×17 inch print from about 18 inches (conventional wisdom is that the distance would be a little greater than that, or 28 inches (the diagonal), but you did buy a high-resolution camera for a reason, didn’t you?).

The next step is dependent on your monitor pitch, which you may or may not know. Turns out, you don’t have to know it. Just take the 253% crops and view then at 1:1. How high are they? Get out your ruler and measure, or just guess. Let’s say they are 6 inches high. 6 inches is about 7 times 0.8333, so in order to view the crops the way they’d look from 18 inches on the print is to view them from 7 times as far away, or 10.5 feet.

Everything here scales proportionately. If the image on your screen is bigger than 6 inches, increase your viewing distance by the ratio of your image height to 6 inches. If you thin your viewers are going to almost get their nose to that print and look at it from six inches, divide that 10.5 feet by 3, and look at the image on the monitor from three and a half feet away.

f/5.6

 

f/8

 

f/11

Stopping down improves matter a bit, but it was nice to begin with.

At the right-center edge, just before the dark tree that’s a bit closer than the other foliage:

f/3.5

Some softness is evident. Not bad for a zoom, though.

 

f/5.6

The didn’t help as much as I thought it would.

f/8

Still a bit soft.

f/11

No noticeable improvement.

At the upper-left corner:

f/3.5

Smeared.

f/5.6

Much better, but there’s a ways to go.

f/8

That’s not looking bad for a zoom.

f/11

That’s OK.

 

Now, at 110 mm:

 

 

In the center at the focal point 52 meters away (At Max’s suggestion, I now have a rangefinder, and will be reporting on subject distances):

f/4.5

Really good for a zoom.

f/5.6

 

f/8

 

f/11

 

This is impressive.

At the right-center edge:

f/4.5

A bit soft.

f/5.6

Improving.

f/8

Not bad.

f/11

Pretty good.

In the upper left corner:

 

f/4.5

Soft, but not bad for a zoom.

f/5.6

Crisping up nicely.

f/8

Fine.

f/11

 

Also fine.

So, from yesterday’s and today’s testing, we have a zoom that works better in the corners at the longer focal lengths. 

The question that I have to deal with is: would i ever use a heavy, bulky, manual focus zoom like this on the GFX? I doubt it.

GFX 50S, The Last Word

← Hasselblad HC 80/2.8 and HC 50-110/3.5-4.5 on Fuji GFX Hasselblad HC 150/3.2 on Fuji GFX →

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.