• 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 / HC 120/4 macro & Fuji 120/4 macro on Fuji GFX

HC 120/4 macro & Fuji 120/4 macro on Fuji GFX

April 2, 2017 JimK 7 Comments

This is the 20th in a series of posts on the Fujifilm GFX-50S. The series starts here. 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 tested the first-generation Hasselblad HC 120 mm f/4 macro lens on the Fuji GFX using the Fuji H-lens-to-GFX adapter. The results were poor I had trouble mounting the Fuji adapter to My Arca C1 head — the thread depth in the adapter foot was insufficient to allow the 1/4-20 screw in the mounting plate to fully seat. I feared that that contributed to instability of the mounted lens, and caused the images to be afflicted by motion blur. I fixed the problem. It turns out that what I thought was a genuine RRS mounting plate was actually made by a competitor, and when I attached a real RRS plate, it worked fine.

So I thought I needed to redo the test, which was a comparison with the GFX 120 native macro lens.

Shutter set to EFCS.  Apertures from f/2.8 to f/8 in whole stops. I focused three times at each aperture, and picked the sharpest images.  2-second self-timer used in for the GFX and the a7RII; 3-second shutter delay used for the D810. Arca-Swiss C1 cube on RRS sticks. Focus was upper-center-left of the image, and all images were refocused at each aperture. Tripod and head were not deliberately moved between series, though there appears to have been some shift during the camera and lens changes. Small exposure corrections in Lr. Daylight white balance selected in Lightroom.

The scene with both lenses wide open:

Hasselblad 120

 

Fuji 120

Upper-center-left (focal point) crops at 253%:

Hasselblad 120 @ f/4

 

Fuji 120 @ f/4

The HC lens is soft. The native lens is resolving at nearly the limits of the sensor.

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.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/5.6

 

 

Fuji 120 @ f/5.6

A big step up for the Hasselblad, but it’s tstill not to the level of the Fuji.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/8

 

Fuji 120 @ f/8

Now the HC lens is almost to the impressive levels of the Fuji.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/11

 

Fuji 120 @ f/11

Not that much difference there.

Along the right-upper-middle edge:

Hasselblad 120 @ f/4

 

Fuji 120 @ f/4

The Fuji is a bit soft. The Hasselblad is a lot soft.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/5.6

 

Fuji 120 @ f/5.6

The Hasselblad lens is catching up.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/8

 

Fuji 120 @ f/8

Getting closer, but the HC lens isn’t there yet.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/11

 

Fuji 120 @ f/11

Now they are similar.

In the upper left corner:

Hasselblad 120 @ f/4

 

Fuji 120 @ f/4

We see that smeary effect in the HC lens. It looks kind of like motion blur, but it isn’t.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/5.6

 

Fuji 120 @ f/5.6

 

The HC has a long ways to go.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/8

 

Fuji 120 @ f/8

Now the Hasselblad is getting close.

Hasselblad 120 @ f/11

 

Fuji 120 @ f/11

Pretty much a tie.

So my first test was affected by the adapter instability, although the HC lens is still the loser here. The second-generation Hasselblad lens is reputed to be better.

 

 

 

GFX 50S, The Last Word

← Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar on GFX Hasselblad 35/3.5 HC on GFX →

Comments

  1. Val says

    May 28, 2019 at 10:16 pm

    You are testing macro lenses on a long landscape shot. Most if not all lenses have a sweetspot in distance where they perform well. As the term macro implies this would be the near range. I’m expecting much better results for both of them if you use them for portrait or macro work. Would be interesting which one fares better on closer subjects.

    Reply
  2. Johann says

    June 11, 2020 at 1:15 pm

    Hi Jim,

    Thank you for taking the time to do these reviews! I was wondering if you have any advice for me. I have a Fuji GFX 50s and am interested in purchasing a macro lens to do product photography. Seeing as how the Hasselblad has 1:1 magnification, I was interested in this lens (the mark II is too expensive for me). I am slightly worried about it´s close-up performance, however, especially reports of CAs. Were you able to test that out by any chance? Or do you know an alternative macro that might be a good option for the GFX range?

    All the best and thanks for you detailed reviews!

    Johann

    Reply
    • JimK says

      June 11, 2020 at 3:03 pm

      I didn’t test for LoCA or LaCA, and I’ve sold the lens. Sorry.

      Reply
      • Johann says

        June 12, 2020 at 11:06 am

        Thanks anyway, appreciate all the detailed tests! 🙂

        Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Hasselblad HC 120 macro, Fuji 120mm macro on the GFX-50S says:
    April 2, 2017 at 12:30 pm

    […] HC 120/4 macro an Fuji 120/4 macro on Fuji GFX […]

    Reply
  2. Future Fujifilm GFX 100S Sensor Verified and More GFX 50S Adapted Glass | Fuji Addict says:
    April 3, 2017 at 5:20 am

    […] The Last Word – HC 120/4 macro & Fuji 120/4 macro on Fuji GFX […]

    Reply
  3. Fujifilm GFX-50S Review says:
    April 23, 2017 at 1:31 pm

    […] well does it work with H-series Hasselblad lenses? [It’s a mixed bag. Here. Here. Here. […]

    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.