GFX50sII autofocus blues

[Mads Bjerke]

OP, I think you need to completely start over and disregard this shot as any kind of example that demonstrates anything about the camera or lens. You have too many variables and possibilities of “what happened” that are not determinable at this point.

I don't take this as a demonstration of what either does. I take this as an example of a problem I keep having when using autofocus with this lens. I've made some wonderful images with this combo, but I keep having the AF fail in circumstances where I feel it should perform adequately or better. I don't expect perfection, but the lcd telling me eye detection hits during an afternoon sun photoshoot when shooting at something like 1/400 at f22, and when checking on a computer screen shows the whole person's face is blurry in all 4 shots, I have to wonder what is going on. Is it me? Is it a setting? Is something seriously damaged?

After today, I'm wondering if this is an issue of light and shadow for the AF point. Near pitch black environment today. Had the Q20II with me by chance. I was just haphazardly shooting because I expected it to be bad because of how dark the environment was, even with the flash. My expectations on critical inspection were very low, and well, see for yourself.



F5.6, one handed handheld, 1/100, 800iso.

This is how the raw looks with the flash fire.


text,text,

Do you have another GF lens to compare with?
It is of course possible that the lens/camera isn't performing as designed.

If you leave all settings on the camera unchanged and then try another lens, you should be able to see if the lens is causing your issues.

If the problem persists with another lens you should look at the camera settings.

With a static subject the GFX cameras have very precise AF and you should have critically sharp images every time as long as you use sensible settings for shutter speed and aperture.

Make sure the IBIS is on if shooting handheld.

For reference, I shot with the GFX100 and the GF250+TC handheld and had perfect sharpness every time. A 35-70mm lens should pose no issues.

As I recall (I don't have the GFX anymore) I was always in AF-C (continues AF) and used back button focus. Just keep the button pressed in at all times (never let go) and take the image.

Use a small, but not the smallest AF square for consistently good results.
If you choose the smallest square the AF systems has little data to work with and could slip of the target easier.

If you are using a tripod, you should probably turn off IBIS (I say probably because I don't think I ever did and it was fine).



--
Mads Bjerke
__________________________________________________________________
www.madsbjerke.com

Instagram

Create an account or log in to Instagram - Share what you're into with the people who get you.

www.instagram.com

 

[tjkoko]

...........As I recall (I don't have the GFX anymore) I was always in AF-C (continues AF) and used back button focus. Just keep the button pressed in at all times (never let go) and take the image.

Use a small, but not the smallest AF square for consistently good results.
If you choose the smallest square the AF systems has little data to work with and could slip of the target easier.
If you are using a tripod, you should probably turn off IBIS (I say probably because I don't think I ever did and it was fine).

Right here is where I learned the difference between focus mode vs autofocus mode.


Perhaps AF-C could be more explicitly named AF-CT for continuous tracking. It's just my ability or inability to interpret these instructions.

On my GFX50R which function(?) button should be set-up/reprogrammed for back focusing?

--
I still use my trusty but not dusty Leica DLux4.
Tia and thanks much for your patience,
...and the Dlux4 never ever let me down.
.....tjkoko

 

[A127943]

Do you have another GF lens to compare with?

Alas, the money tree in the backyard has still not grown very tall.

Make sure the IBIS is on if shooting handheld.

Had that off, it could be the underlying issue. I shall see how it goes going forward. No idea how long it's been off, but somehow I turned it off at some point.

For reference, I shot with the GFX100 and the GF250+TC handheld and had perfect sharpness every time. A 35-70mm lens should pose no issues.

Not a fair comparison according to every source telling me the AF on the 100 is far superior to the 50sII

--
Wizard of the Hood baby.

 

[JimKasson]

Do you have another GF lens to compare with?

Alas, the money tree in the backyard has still not grown very tall.

Make sure the IBIS is on if shooting handheld.

Had that off, it could be the underlying issue. I shall see how it goes going forward. No idea how long it's been off, but somehow I turned it off at some point.

For reference, I shot with the GFX100 and the GF250+TC handheld and had perfect sharpness every time. A 35-70mm lens should pose no issues.

Not a fair comparison according to every source telling me the AF on the 100 is far superior to the 50sII

The autofocus for static subjects of the GFX 50S and GFX 50R is every bit as accurate as -- but slower than -- the autofocus for the GFX 100 and GFX 100S. I haven't tested the GFX 50S II, but I'd be floored if the AF took a step backwards.

 

[yogi4fitness]

Someone explain how this is a user error so I can make this stop.

GFX50sII, 35-70mm kit lens. Daylight, 11:18 am. F8. Shutter 1/200th. Handheld. And I get this sorta results from the AF, over and over again. I took over 30 photos of this stump from two angles with the AF and less than 5 are critically sharp. I'm less than 15ft away at times and the autofocus can't hit to save its life. What is this? Why is this? Do I need to use a tripod and manual focus every time instead of the AF? Is this just a by product of the zoom being trash at anything but 35 and 70? Why is my autofocus so capable of failing when it tells me it hits on an unmoving object? Do I have a bad copy of the lens? Bad body?



GFX50sII

EFCS on?

I always have EFCS on. Would that make a difference in nailing focus?

 

[JimKasson]

Someone explain how this is a user error so I can make this stop.

GFX50sII, 35-70mm kit lens. Daylight, 11:18 am. F8. Shutter 1/200th. Handheld. And I get this sorta results from the AF, over and over again. I took over 30 photos of this stump from two angles with the AF and less than 5 are critically sharp. I'm less than 15ft away at times and the autofocus can't hit to save its life. What is this? Why is this? Do I need to use a tripod and manual focus every time instead of the AF? Is this just a by product of the zoom being trash at anything but 35 and 70? Why is my autofocus so capable of failing when it tells me it hits on an unmoving object? Do I have a bad copy of the lens? Bad body?



GFX50sII

EFCS on?

I always have EFCS on. Would that make a difference in nailing focus?

Not in nailing focus per se, but MS can affect sharpness through shutter shock.

--

the last word the last word - Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

blog.kasson.com

 

[tjkoko]

tjkoko wrote:...................On my GFX50R which function(?) button should be set-up/reprogrammed for back focusing?

It's the Fn4 button!!!

 

[Valued Customer]

tjkoko wrote:...................On my GFX50R which function(?) button should be set-up/reprogrammed for back focusing?

It's the Fn4 button!!!

The f4 button is the upper right hand side button on back of camera between the S/C/M lever and scroll wheel.

 

[tjkoko]

tjkoko wrote:...................On my GFX50R which function(?) button should be set-up/reprogrammed for back focusing?

It's the Fn4 button!!!

The f4 button is the upper right hand side button on back of camera between the S/C/M lever and scroll wheel.

Actually it's located to the right side of the rear command dial and further from the SCM dial -- not in between. And I possess the full manual with a few pages hard copied to my notebook; namely the displays for the lcd and the diagrams that explains all of the controls -- something that everyone should possess. This unit is a real learning experience.

--
I still use my trusty but not dusty Leica DLux4.
Tia and thanks much for your patience,
...and the Dlux4 never ever let me down.
.....tjkoko

 

[Mads Bjerke]

For reference, I shot with the GFX100 and the GF250+TC handheld and had perfect sharpness every time. A 35-70mm lens should pose no issues.

Not a fair comparison according to every source telling me the AF on the 100 is far superior to the 50sII

I used the GF250/TC on the GFX50s and it was just as solid on a static subject.

 

[A127943]

The autofocus for static subjects of the GFX 50S and GFX 50R is every bit as accurate as -- but slower than -- the autofocus for the GFX 100 and GFX 100S. I haven't tested the GFX 50S II, but I'd be floored if the AF took a step backwards.

Wasn't the whole AF system switch FUJI did for the 100 to get more refined and faster results?

 

[Mads Bjerke]

The autofocus for static subjects of the GFX 50S and GFX 50R is every bit as accurate as -- but slower than -- the autofocus for the GFX 100 and GFX 100S. I haven't tested the GFX 50S II, but I'd be floored if the AF took a step backwards.

Wasn't the whole AF system switch FUJI did for the 100 to get more refined and faster results?

The GFX100 and GFX100s incorporate phase detect AF as opposed to contrast based AF.
Phase detect AF is much better at continues AF and it also pulses less (better for video AF).
It it also generally faster.

If all you shoot is static subjects, such as landscapes and cityscapes, you will not really see much benefit from the Phase Detect AF.

There are pro's that use the GFX50 in high end fashion work and the results are stellar.
Search for Ben Kanarek for example.

Bottom line is the GFX50 and GFX100 series have solid AF.
If you aren't seeing the results you would expect it is most likely down to either user error (settings or technique) or faulty gear.

 

[A127943]

Shot around yesterday. I really think it boils down to me having the IBIS off since that's the one thing I changed, and everything looks so much crisper overall. Look at the detail on the enclosed image. Thank y'all for helping me figure this out. Curses to the harder culling process by having more good images to choose from, lol.

--



A55kTg((2-001m@$$21mE43Mls0&4

 

[JimKasson]

The autofocus for static subjects of the GFX 50S and GFX 50R is every bit as accurate as -- but slower than -- the autofocus for the GFX 100 and GFX 100S. I haven't tested the GFX 50S II, but I'd be floored if the AF took a step backwards.

Wasn't the whole AF system switch FUJI did for the 100 to get more refined and faster results?

Faster, yes. The results are not more accurate. My measurements on the CDAF system showed it to be quite accurate.

--
https://blog.kasson.com

 

[ProfHankD]

Shot around yesterday. I really think it boils down to me having the IBIS off since that's the one thing I changed, and everything looks so much crisper overall. Look at the detail on the enclosed image. Thank y'all for helping me figure this out. Curses to the harder culling process by having more good images to choose from, lol.

No; IBIS is good, but the big thing you changed was the scene. ;-)

Most cameras default to picking the thing closest to the camera when given no specific focus target, and thus I think your stumps simply were not what it picked.

Personally, this is the sort of thing that drives me nuts. I am usually focusing for positioning of DoF, not just the spot of best focus, and AF systems are generally pretty terrible at doing what I want. This is why I prefer manual focus most of the time. Put another way, AF is either giving-up some creative control or outsourcing that control to a computerized assistant, and outsourcing is often no better than the detail level of the instructions you give your assistant. You at least need to tell the camera where to focus, otherwise, you've given up that creative control entirely.

 

[JimKasson]

Shot around yesterday. I really think it boils down to me having the IBIS off since that's the one thing I changed, and everything looks so much crisper overall. Look at the detail on the enclosed image. Thank y'all for helping me figure this out. Curses to the harder culling process by having more good images to choose from, lol.

No; IBIS is good, but the big thing you changed was the scene. ;-)

Most cameras default to picking the thing closest to the camera when given no specific focus target, and thus I think your stumps simply were not what it picked.

Personally, this is the sort of thing that drives me nuts. I am usually focusing for positioning of DoF, not just the spot of best focus, and AF systems are generally pretty terrible at doing what I want. This is why I prefer manual focus most of the time.

For static scenes, I totally agree.

Put another way, AF is either giving-up some creative control or outsourcing that control to a computerized assistant, and outsourcing is often no better than the detail level of the instructions you give your assistant.

And, just like an assistant, the camera's AF systems have their own way of doing things that you probably don't totally understand.

You at least need to tell the camera where to focus, otherwise, you've given up that creative control entirely.

Yes. Aim your camera at a landscape through a window screen. What will the camera focus on?

 

[SrMi]

Shot around yesterday. I really think it boils down to me having the IBIS off since that's the one thing I changed, and everything looks so much crisper overall. Look at the detail on the enclosed image. Thank y'all for helping me figure this out. Curses to the harder culling process by having more good images to choose from, lol.

No; IBIS is good, but the big thing you changed was the scene. ;-)

Most cameras default to picking the thing closest to the camera when given no specific focus target, and thus I think your stumps simply were not what it picked.

Personally, this is the sort of thing that drives me nuts. I am usually focusing for positioning of DoF, not just the spot of best focus, and AF systems are generally pretty terrible at doing what I want. This is why I prefer manual focus most of the time. Put another way, AF is either giving-up some creative control or outsourcing that control to a computerized assistant, and outsourcing is often no better than the detail level of the instructions you give your assistant. You at least need to tell the camera where to focus, otherwise, you've given up that creative control entirely.

Using AF does not mean that you have to let the camera decide where to focus. AF (field or spot mode) can have the same flexibility as MF but is often faster and more convenient. In rare situations, AF cannot acquire proper focus even if I specify exactly which part of the scene to focus on. With BBF, it is easy to switch to MF quickly.

 

[JimKasson]

Using AF does not mean that you have to let the camera decide where to focus. AF (field or spot mode) can have the same flexibility as MF but is often faster and more convenient. In rare situations, AF cannot acquire proper focus even if I specify exactly which part of the scene to focus on.

For me, those situations are not rare.

With BBF, it is easy to switch to MF quickly.

 

[SrMi]

Using AF does not mean that you have to let the camera decide where to focus. AF (field or spot mode) can have the same flexibility as MF but is often faster and more convenient. In rare situations, AF cannot acquire proper focus even if I specify exactly which part of the scene to focus on.

For me, those situations are not rare.

I was thinking more of landscape photography, as seen in OP.

But, yes, there are types of photography where MF will get better results, though focus bracketing will probably be even better.

Also, there are cameras with broken AF.

With BBF, it is easy to switch to MF quickly.

 

[JimKasson]

Using AF does not mean that you have to let the camera decide where to focus. AF (field or spot mode) can have the same flexibility as MF but is often faster and more convenient. In rare situations, AF cannot acquire proper focus even if I specify exactly which part of the scene to focus on.

For me, those situations are not rare.

I was thinking more of landscape photography, as seen in OP.

But, yes, there are types of photography where MF will get better results, though focus bracketing will probably be even better.

True that.

Here's a classic question. Near the edge of an image with a short lens, do you want the radial direction sharpest or the tangential direction sharpest? And what do you think your AF system will do?