Focus Beyond Infinity
p.1 #1Focus Beyond Infinity
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.
Jan 04, 2026 at 05:21 AM
p.1 #2Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know that especially when the shooter noted they might not have obtained focus for the shot at all and simply took the shot without focussing.
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know that especially when the shooter noted they might not have obtained focus for the shot at all and simply took the shot without focussing.
Jan 04, 2026 at 09:41 AM
p.1 #3Focus Beyond Infinity
Steve Spencer wrote:
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know...Show more →
There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.
Nielk Mike wrote
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.
Jan 04, 2026 at 10:40 AM
p.1 #4Focus Beyond Infinity
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately in normal shooting conditions.* Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
*The only exception I have found is using wide angle lenses for astro photography. Here there is so little subject contrast available other than random point sources for an af sensor to lock onto, plus the additional shallow DoF from using a fast aperture, that judiciously careful manual focus is required. This is further compromised by relatively poor performance of EVF’s or LCD’s in low light, that experimentation and experience in knowing how your system works becomes paramount for accurate infinity focus. With Fuji, I know for my desired combination of body and lens exactly how much the manual focus scale marker needs to be pulled back for true infinity focus — IOW a little preparation and practice in advance will overcome the system’s shortcomings. And all cameras have similar shortcomings, not just Fuji…
Edited on Jan 04, 2026 at 12:24 PM · View previous versions
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately in normal shooting conditions.* Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
*The only exception I have found is using wide angle lenses for astro photography. Here there is so little subject contrast available other than random point sources for an af sensor to lock onto, plus the additional shallow DoF from using a fast aperture, that judiciously careful manual focus is required. This is further compromised by relatively poor performance of EVF’s or LCD’s in low light, that experimentation and experience in knowing how your system works becomes paramount for accurate infinity focus. With Fuji, I know for my desired combination of body and lens exactly how much the manual focus scale marker needs to be pulled back for true infinity focus — IOW a little preparation and practice in advance will overcome the system’s shortcomings. And all cameras have similar shortcomings, not just Fuji…
Edited on Jan 04, 2026 at 12:24 PM · View previous versions
Jan 04, 2026 at 12:10 PM
p.1 #5Focus Beyond Infinity
Jack Flesher wrote:
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model...Show more →
Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model...Show more →
Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.
Jan 04, 2026 at 12:20 PM
p.1 #6Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.
AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…
Jack Flesher wrote
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…
Jan 04, 2026 at 12:29 PM
p.1 #7Focus Beyond Infinity
Jack Flesher wrote:
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…
Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".
Jan 04, 2026 at 12:58 PM
p.1 #8Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".
Uh no, your assumption is wrong. All parafocal means is the lens doesn’t change focus as you zoom. The parafocal zoom lens still needs room past infinity to allow for expansion of the barrel diminishing infinity focus. It’s a lens design 101 consideration, any lens with a focusing system needs consideration for thermal expansion.
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
Uh no, your assumption is wrong. All parafocal means is the lens doesn’t change focus as you zoom. The parafocal zoom lens still needs room past infinity to allow for expansion of the barrel diminishing infinity focus. It’s a lens design 101 consideration, any lens with a focusing system needs consideration for thermal expansion.
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.
Jan 04, 2026 at 03:20 PM
p.1 #9Focus Beyond Infinity
Jack Flesher wrote:
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".Uh no, your assumption is wrong. All parafocal means is the lens doesn’t change focus as you zoom. The parafocal zoom lens still needs room past infinity to allow for expansion of the barrel diminishing infinity focus. It’s a lens design 101 consideration, any lens with a focusing system needs consideration for thermal expansion.
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to...Show more →
You don't get this - and that is fine. It is not about the ability of a lens to focus beyond infinity - it is about the AF focusing beyond infinity which shouldn't happen. And parfocal or not has an impact on how the Distance Limiter Function works (or doesn't). No need to discuss any further. Happy New year.
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to...Show more →
You don't get this - and that is fine. It is not about the ability of a lens to focus beyond infinity - it is about the AF focusing beyond infinity which shouldn't happen. And parfocal or not has an impact on how the Distance Limiter Function works (or doesn't). No need to discuss any further. Happy New year.
Jan 05, 2026 at 12:45 AM
p.1 #10Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know that especially when the shooter noted they might not have obtained focus for the shot at all and simply took the shot without focussing.There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.
The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this shot.
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this shot.
Jan 05, 2026 at 05:58 AM
|
p.1 #11Focus Beyond Infinity
Steve Spencer wrote:
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know that especially when the shooter noted they might not have obtained focus for the shot at all and simply took the shot without focussing.There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this...Show more →
He said he missed to "refocus" and not that he did not focus before. The overall softness is a typical sign of focus beyond infinity. If he had focused to a closer distance than the resulting OOF area would look very different.
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.He said he missed to "refocus" and not that he did not focus before. The overall softness is a typical sign of focus beyond infinity. If he had focused to a closer distance than the resulting OOF area would look very different.
Jan 05, 2026 at 06:41 AM
p.1 #12Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know that especially when the shooter noted they might not have obtained focus for the shot at all and simply took the shot without focussing.There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this shot.He said he missed to "refocus" and not that he did not focus before. The overall softness is a typical sign of focus beyond infinity. If he had focused to a closer distance than the resulting OOF area would look very different.
If you read what he said, he actually said he wasn't sure what he did for focus and might not have focussed at all. It was cold and he was working fast and had gloves on. He did not obtain anything close to optimal focus and acknowledged that. It was user error and says nothing about the system. He knows he could have and should have obtained better focus.
I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.If you read what he said, he actually said he wasn't sure what he did for focus and might not have focussed at all. It was cold and he was working fast and had gloves on. He did not obtain anything close to optimal focus and acknowledged that. It was user error and says nothing about the system. He knows he could have and should have obtained better focus.
I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.
Jan 05, 2026 at 06:57 AM
p.1 #13Focus Beyond Infinity
Steve Spencer wrote:
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know that especially when the shooter noted they might not have obtained focus for the shot at all and simply took the shot without focussing.There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this shot.He said he missed to "refocus" and not that he did not focus before. The overall softness is a typical sign of focus beyond infinity. If he had focused to a closer distance than the resulting OOF area would look very different.If you read what he said, he actually said he wasn't sure what he did for focus and might not have focussed at all. It was cold and he was working fast and had gloves on. He did not obtain anything close to optimal focus and acknowledged that. It was user error and says nothing about the system. He knows he could have and should have obtained better focus.
I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the...Show more →
Unless he was using BBF (which we don't know) half pressing the shutter button and aiming at the building (seems steady, no shake) triggers the AF. If AF was triggered on the house and results in overall softness like in this case, then it is a clear sign of focus beyond infinity.
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
The image in this thread over at dpreview https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/is-this-photo-sharp.4826142/ is a fine example of an image where the camera set focus beyond infinity: Overall soft and nothing in critical focus. Yet: Over at dpreview the folks deny that focus beyond infinity is a Fuji issue - so they sprinkle the poor guy with advice on post processing. That's why I think being aware of the issue is important.I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the...Show more →
Unless he was using BBF (which we don't know) half pressing the shutter button and aiming at the building (seems steady, no shake) triggers the AF. If AF was triggered on the house and results in overall softness like in this case, then it is a clear sign of focus beyond infinity.
Jan 05, 2026 at 07:12 AM
p.1 #14Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this shot.He said he missed to "refocus" and not that he did not focus before. The overall softness is a typical sign of focus beyond infinity. If he had focused to a closer distance than the resulting OOF area would look very different.If you read what he said, he actually said he wasn't sure what he did for focus and might not have focussed at all. It was cold and he was working fast and had gloves on. He did not obtain anything close to optimal focus and acknowledged that. It was user error and says nothing about the system. He knows he could have and should have obtained better focus.
I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.Unless he was using BBF (which we don't know) half pressing the shutter button and aiming at the building (seems steady, no shake) triggers the AF. If AF was triggered on the house and results in overall softness like in this case, then it is a clear sign of focus beyond infinity.
That unless is important. He might well have been using BBF. The if is also an important if. What is clear from the post is he was not claiming that he tried to focus on the building. You are right that "if" he tried to focus on the building and he got the outcome he got, then it would indicate the system didn't work as he intended. But that was not his claim. He couldn't recall what he tried to focus on or even if he tried to focus at all. We simply don't know, and the shooter can't remember, what he was trying to focus on in this shot, so we can't draw any inferences about whether the system worked or did not work in this instance. User error seems not only a plausible cause for the poor focus but a likely cause.
Edited on Jan 05, 2026 at 07:32 AM · View previous versions
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
I don't think that we have any idea where that shot was focussed. The shooter acknowledged that they likely did not refocus the shot because it was cold and they were wearing gloves. It could simply be that the shot was focussed at a much further distance than optimal, but not past infinity. It seems likely that the shot suffers from not obtaining good focus, but the nature of the focus problems I don't think we can know. It might be the case that the camera set the focus beyond infinity, but I don't know how we could know that especially when the shooter noted they might not have obtained focus for the shot at all and simply took the shot without focussing.I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.
That unless is important. He might well have been using BBF. The if is also an important if. What is clear from the post is he was not claiming that he tried to focus on the building. You are right that "if" he tried to focus on the building and he got the outcome he got, then it would indicate the system didn't work as he intended. But that was not his claim. He couldn't recall what he tried to focus on or even if he tried to focus at all. We simply don't know, and the shooter can't remember, what he was trying to focus on in this shot, so we can't draw any inferences about whether the system worked or did not work in this instance. User error seems not only a plausible cause for the poor focus but a likely cause.
Edited on Jan 05, 2026 at 07:32 AM · View previous versions
Jan 05, 2026 at 07:31 AM
p.1 #15Focus Beyond Infinity
Mike, when you write “focusing beyond infinity,” how are you determining this? Are you looking at some readout on the camera and seeing that it indicates “beyond infinity,” or are you analyzing in some way an image to determine this?
Nielk Mike wrote:
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".Uh no, your assumption is wrong. All parafocal means is the lens doesn’t change focus as you zoom. The parafocal zoom lens still needs room past infinity to allow for expansion of the barrel diminishing infinity focus. It’s a lens design 101 consideration, any lens with a focusing system needs consideration for thermal expansion.
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.You don't get this - and that is fine. It is not about the ability of a lens to focus beyond infinity - it is about the AF focusing beyond infinity which shouldn't happen. And parfocal or not has an impact on how the Distance Limiter Function works (or doesn't). No need to discuss any further. Happy New year.
Nielk Mike wrote:
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.
Jan 05, 2026 at 07:32 AM
p.1 #16Focus Beyond Infinity
Steve Spencer wrote:
The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this shot.He said he missed to "refocus" and not that he did not focus before. The overall softness is a typical sign of focus beyond infinity. If he had focused to a closer distance than the resulting OOF area would look very different.If you read what he said, he actually said he wasn't sure what he did for focus and might not have focussed at all. It was cold and he was working fast and had gloves on. He did not obtain anything close to optimal focus and acknowledged that. It was user error and says nothing about the system. He knows he could have and should have obtained better focus.
I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.Unless he was using BBF (which we don't know) half pressing the shutter button and aiming at the building (seems steady, no shake) triggers the AF. If AF was triggered on the house and results in overall softness like in this case, then it is a clear sign of focus beyond infinity.That unless is important. He might well have been using BBF. The if is also an important if. What is clear from the post is he was not claiming that he tried to focus on the building. You are right that "if" he tried to focus on the building and he got the outcome he got, then it would indicate the system didn't work as he intended. But that was not his claim. He couldn't recall what he tried to focus on or even if he tried to focus at all. We simply don't know, and the shooter can't...Show more →
If he aims at the building and presses the shutter button - it is focusing on the building - unless in MF or BBF
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
There is an overall softness extending to infinity which is absolutely consistent with focus beyond infinity. Nothing is in critical focus. And it is not motion blur.I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.
If he aims at the building and presses the shutter button - it is focusing on the building - unless in MF or BBF
Jan 05, 2026 at 08:20 AM
p.1 #17Focus Beyond Infinity
gdanmitchell wrote:
Mike, when you write “focusing beyond infinity,” how are you determining this? Are you looking at some readout on the camera and seeing that it indicates “beyond infinity,” or are you analyzing in some way an image to determine this?
AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".Uh no, your assumption is wrong. All parafocal means is the lens doesn’t change focus as you zoom. The parafocal zoom lens still needs room past infinity to allow for expansion of the barrel diminishing infinity focus. It’s a lens design 101 consideration, any lens with a focusing system needs consideration for thermal expansion.
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.You don't get this - and that is fine. It is not about the ability of a lens to focus beyond infinity - it is about the AF focusing beyond infinity which shouldn't happen. And parfocal or not has an impact on how the Distance Limiter Function works (or doesn't). No need to discuss any further. Happy New year.
Dan, it is how the image has an overall "softness" that you won't see in the EVF. It is not critically sharp anywhere. I have seen many of those "beyond infinity" images in my early Fuji times from myself and others. An image that has not been correctly focused looks different. You can try yourself by slightly focusing beyond infinity manually to obtain that certain overall "softness". In many cases, people don't even notice until they look closer or crop in.
Mike, when you write “focusing beyond infinity,” how are you determining this? Are you looking at some readout on the camera and seeing that it indicates “beyond infinity,” or are you analyzing in some way an image to determine this?
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.
Dan, it is how the image has an overall "softness" that you won't see in the EVF. It is not critically sharp anywhere. I have seen many of those "beyond infinity" images in my early Fuji times from myself and others. An image that has not been correctly focused looks different. You can try yourself by slightly focusing beyond infinity manually to obtain that certain overall "softness". In many cases, people don't even notice until they look closer or crop in.
Jan 05, 2026 at 08:25 AM
p.1 #18Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".Uh no, your assumption is wrong. All parafocal means is the lens doesn’t change focus as you zoom. The parafocal zoom lens still needs room past infinity to allow for expansion of the barrel diminishing infinity focus. It’s a lens design 101 consideration, any lens with a focusing system needs consideration for thermal expansion.
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.You don't get this - and that is fine. It is not about the ability of a lens to focus beyond infinity - it is about the AF focusing beyond infinity which shouldn't happen. And parfocal or not has an impact on how the Distance Limiter Function works (or doesn't). No need to discuss any further. Happy New year.
No, you don’t understand. The point is that an uninformed user CAN focus beyond infinity WITHOUT IT BEING A FAULT OF THE CAMERA. They can improperly use manual focus, or they can improperly use AF. With AF, if they focus at 16mm on their intended subject then zoom to 50mm without re-focusing, they could easily end up focused beyond infinity.
Regardless, proper use for infinity focus for general imaging WITH ANY CAMERA SYSTEM is using the hyper focal distance appropriate for aperture and focal chosen. The exceptions to this best practice are few, the aforementioned Astro imaging is one of them.
Again Mike, the point YOU are missing is that the camera, any camera, is just a tool and therefore incumbent upon the user to understand how to use it.
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Virtually every lens can and is in fact designed to focus beyond infinity at normal temperatures. As ambient temperature increases, the metal or composite barrels can expand slightly. This in turn can slightly increase focal length, requiring a bit of extra focus extension to compensate. Conversely, this difference grows in colder temperatures as the barrel materials shrink, requiring less extension for infinity, allowing a lens to be focused even further beyond infinity. Obviously the effect is less critical on shorter focal lengths than for telephoto lenses, but present nonetheless.Good AF should —and in my experience with later model Fuji camera bodies and AF lenses does— compensate adequately. Folks that use manual focus and assume the far “stop” on their focus ring is infinity are going to over-focus frequently. Folks that know how to rely on hyper-focal for their chosen aperture, will always focus at least slightly behind infinity and know to never rely on the focus ring stop point…
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.
No, you don’t understand. The point is that an uninformed user CAN focus beyond infinity WITHOUT IT BEING A FAULT OF THE CAMERA. They can improperly use manual focus, or they can improperly use AF. With AF, if they focus at 16mm on their intended subject then zoom to 50mm without re-focusing, they could easily end up focused beyond infinity.
Regardless, proper use for infinity focus for general imaging WITH ANY CAMERA SYSTEM is using the hyper focal distance appropriate for aperture and focal chosen. The exceptions to this best practice are few, the aforementioned Astro imaging is one of them.
Again Mike, the point YOU are missing is that the camera, any camera, is just a tool and therefore incumbent upon the user to understand how to use it.
Jan 05, 2026 at 09:12 AM
p.1 #19Focus Beyond Infinity
Jack Flesher wrote:
AF wide Zooms by design will focus further beyond infinity at the wider focals for precisely the expansion reason I listed above. It isn’t a fault of the design, any mis-focus is a fault of the user for not understanding their equipment. Cameras and lenses are just tools, and a true craftsman understands how their specific tools are designed to work, and uses them accordingly…Wrong. With zooms, it is not allow for expansion and retraction in changing temperatures. It is the lens not being parfocal. So much for "true craftsmanship".Uh no, your assumption is wrong. All parafocal means is the lens doesn’t change focus as you zoom. The parafocal zoom lens still needs room past infinity to allow for expansion of the barrel diminishing infinity focus. It’s a lens design 101 consideration, any lens with a focusing system needs consideration for thermal expansion.
Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.You don't get this - and that is fine. It is not about the ability of a lens to focus beyond infinity - it is about the AF focusing beyond infinity which shouldn't happen. And parfocal or not has an impact on how the Distance Limiter Function works (or doesn't). No need to discuss any further. Happy New year.No, you don’t understand. The point is that an uninformed user CAN focus beyond infinity WITHOUT IT BEING A FAULT OF THE CAMERA. They can improperly use manual focus, or they can improperly use AF. With AF, if they focus at 16mm on their intended subject then zoom to 50mm without re-focusing, they could easily end up focused beyond infinity.
Regardless, proper use for infinity focus for general imaging WITH ANY CAMERA SYSTEM is using the hyper focal distance appropriate for aperture and focal chosen. The exceptions to this best practice are few, the aforementioned Astro imaging is one...Show more →
You don't get it. It is not about uninformed missing focus - it is about Fuji AF focusing beyond infinity. Of course, you are way too professional to ever encounter this with a Fuji. So good light and have fun.
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Of course "by wire" lenses can focus beyond infinity. Sony lenses can, too. But only my Fuji cameras (in particular with WA lenses zooms at the wider settings) tend to do this on a regular basis. The distance limiter function can prevent that - but only for prime lenses. Fuji zooms are not parfocal, so the infinity position depends on the focal length that is dialed in.Not only that, but most contemporary zooms labelled as "parafocal" are not truly parafocal, and still require a minor focus tweak for perfect focus at a new focal length setting. This is especially true going from initial focus at the wide end then zooming to telephoto.
Regardless, proper use for infinity focus for general imaging WITH ANY CAMERA SYSTEM is using the hyper focal distance appropriate for aperture and focal chosen. The exceptions to this best practice are few, the aforementioned Astro imaging is one...Show more →
You don't get it. It is not about uninformed missing focus - it is about Fuji AF focusing beyond infinity. Of course, you are way too professional to ever encounter this with a Fuji. So good light and have fun.
Jan 05, 2026 at 09:42 AM
p.1 #20Focus Beyond Infinity
Nielk Mike wrote:
He said he missed to "refocus" and not that he did not focus before. The overall softness is a typical sign of focus beyond infinity. If he had focused to a closer distance than the resulting OOF area would look very different.If you read what he said, he actually said he wasn't sure what he did for focus and might not have focussed at all. It was cold and he was working fast and had gloves on. He did not obtain anything close to optimal focus and acknowledged that. It was user error and says nothing about the system. He knows he could have and should have obtained better focus.
I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.Unless he was using BBF (which we don't know) half pressing the shutter button and aiming at the building (seems steady, no shake) triggers the AF. If AF was triggered on the house and results in overall softness like in this case, then it is a clear sign of focus beyond infinity.That unless is important. He might well have been using BBF. The if is also an important if. What is clear from the post is he was not claiming that he tried to focus on the building. You are right that "if" he tried to focus on the building and he got the outcome he got, then it would indicate the system didn't work as he intended. But that was not his claim. He couldn't recall what he tried to focus on or even if he tried to focus at all. We simply don't know, and the shooter can't remember, what he was trying to focus on in this shot, so we can't draw any inferences about whether the system worked or did not work in this instance. User error seems not only a plausible cause for the poor focus but a likely cause.If he aims at the building and presses the shutter button - it is focusing on the building - unless in MF or BBF
But we don't even know he aimed at the building and we don't know if he was in MF or BBF, and he can't remember to tell us, so we can't infer anything. There are a lot of hypotheticals here and you and even the shooter can't answer them.
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Nielk Mike wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
The point you are missing is the shooter acknowledged that he didn't obtain good focus in this shot and probably didn't focus at all. The softness is user error as acknowledged by the user. It says nothing about the camera or the focussing system. Every system can have focus errors due to user error. In practice I don't have trouble focussing my Fuji cameras, but occasionally I make mistakes like this user did. I haven't yet had the camera make a mistake that wasn't my fault. I suppose it could happen, but that was not the case for this shot.I certainly have shots like that too. It happens. Obviously the solution is to be more careful about obtaining focus, but such a shot doesn't tell us anything about the system and how easy it would have been to get good focus if more care was exercised. I have had an occasional mistake like this with every system I have shot and with none of them (including Fuji) was it difficult to get the focus right on such a shot if I used the system properly. On this shot, it is not a system issue it was simply a user mistake, or so it appears.
But we don't even know he aimed at the building and we don't know if he was in MF or BBF, and he can't remember to tell us, so we can't infer anything. There are a lot of hypotheticals here and you and even the shooter can't answer them.
Jan 05, 2026 at 09:59 AM