Hi all -

Now I've got my Fuji GFX 100S, I thought I'd investigate for myself what the situation is with the pixel shift capability. Obviously based on everything I've seen elsewhere, I don't believe it is fit for purpose (yet).

Of course if one wants to multiply the resolution of an image by a factor of 4***, then there are ways other than pixel shifting that can provide the same (?) result. One of these ways would be to increase the magnification by a factor of 2, and then shoot four shifted images so that they encompass the field of view given from the single image taken at the original magnification. Obviously this in a theoretical scenario - you'd have to shoot some overlapping shots as well to actually make sure you captured everything.

However for the purpose of my proposed test, I don't really need to capture the entire original frame at twice the original magnification - just the center of the fame should suffice.

The CAPcam that I've got my GFX mounted to makes this a pretty trivial thing to test - I have a single checkbox that I can tick in the CAPcam software that will put the camera into macro mode. I.e. set up a shot at 1:2 magnification, check the box, and the lens will move to the right position to capture the image at 2:1 - no other input needed.

And of course, there is an initial magnification that can be used that, when flipping the numerator and denominator, will result in a doubling of the magnification. I'll spare you the maths, but it is 1: (square root of 2), or, 1:1.41.

So the intention is to shoot at 1:1.41, both a regular 100MP shot (for reference) and a 400MP pixel shifted shot. Then, move to 1.41:1, and shoot a regular 100MP shot.

My question is this - is it a valid comparison to take the center of the frame of the 400MP shot, and compare it directly to the 100MP shot that has been taken at twice the magnification?

My lens should be up to the task - it's the Linos Inspec.X L 5.6/105 Float. Specifically designed for optimal performance in the 1:3 to 3:1 macro range, and with a floating element that you set to the magnification at which you are shooting.

Before I set out to do this, I would very much welcome any thoughts/suggestions/criticisms about the approach.

Kind regards,

Gerald.

(*** or I guess, 2, if you're being pedantic - let's not go there)

Now I've got my Fuji GFX 100S, I thought I'd investigate for myself what the situation is with the pixel shift capability. Obviously based on everything I've seen elsewhere, I don't believe it is fit for purpose (yet).

Of course if one wants to multiply the resolution of an image by a factor of 4***, then there are ways other than pixel shifting that can provide the same (?) result. One of these ways would be to increase the magnification by a factor of 2, and then shoot four shifted images so that they encompass the field of view given from the single image taken at the original magnification. Obviously this in a theoretical scenario - you'd have to shoot some overlapping shots as well to actually make sure you captured everything.

However for the purpose of my proposed test, I don't really need to capture the entire original frame at twice the original magnification - just the center of the fame should suffice.

The CAPcam that I've got my GFX mounted to makes this a pretty trivial thing to test - I have a single checkbox that I can tick in the CAPcam software that will put the camera into macro mode. I.e. set up a shot at 1:2 magnification, check the box, and the lens will move to the right position to capture the image at 2:1 - no other input needed.

And of course, there is an initial magnification that can be used that, when flipping the numerator and denominator, will result in a doubling of the magnification. I'll spare you the maths, but it is 1: (square root of 2), or, 1:1.41.

So the intention is to shoot at 1:1.41, both a regular 100MP shot (for reference) and a 400MP pixel shifted shot. Then, move to 1.41:1, and shoot a regular 100MP shot.

My question is this - is it a valid comparison to take the center of the frame of the 400MP shot, and compare it directly to the 100MP shot that has been taken at twice the magnification?

My lens should be up to the task - it's the Linos Inspec.X L 5.6/105 Float. Specifically designed for optimal performance in the 1:3 to 3:1 macro range, and with a floating element that you set to the magnification at which you are shooting.

Before I set out to do this, I would very much welcome any thoughts/suggestions/criticisms about the approach.

Kind regards,

Gerald.

(*** or I guess, 2, if you're being pedantic - let's not go there)

Last edited: