Sharpness of images on Graflex Speed Graphic

I bought a used Speed Graphic 4x5 camera. The images I get back seem

soft when I look at them with a 8x loupe. Some images are better

then others, and the pictures I am posting here are about the best

I've gotten from it. I try to stop down to a minimum of f5.6. The

lens is a Graflex Optar 135/4.7. I've heard this lens is not the

best. I'm wondering if its the back which may not be showing the

correct focus or not. Its hard getting sharp images even though they

look fine on the ground glass when framed up. Some images almost

look blurred. Here is the first scan done on my Epson 2400 with

transparency adapter. This one is the full frame.

Here is a closer crop of the full image.

And this one is a closeup. It was scanned at 2400 dpi showing the small section chosen. This was taken on TMAX 100 film closer to dusk. You can even see the grain here, but the edges or accutance is not sharp. Is this typical for 4x5, or of this lens? If I replaced the lens would I get sharper results if I got one of the Ektar 127 lenses that are also used on this camera? I've seen posted images made from the Ektar and you can see fine skin hairs of a picture of a nude woman. That pic she filled most of the frame. I've also taken 4x5 on a view camera and gotten sharp images from it. Is my focussing screen off?

Focus on a row of dominos; a picket fence; a yardstick at an angle. Does your focus of your ground glass and or ranglefinder agree with the films's focus point. Here at say F5.6 to F22; my Ektar radically exceeds the old epson 2450 flatbed; in the central core. Track down a focus bias; also try your lens at F11 too.

What percentage of the total surface area of the film do you think you are asking to be superb. Yes, the focus plane, lens quality, etc. could be off. But there are so many variables in a single piece of film, including where it is sat in the holder, whether the film moved or buckled, was there any shutter "recoil," and the OVERALL TRIPOD STABILITY-not to mention a sample of one. You didn't note the shutter speed and I do think f/11 or even f/16 is a fairer test. Lastly, in my experience, an infinity focus is not the best practical test of a lens or focus. For hand-held cameras, I go by what the lens does at 8 feet and 15 feet. In your case, I woudl repeat the anaysis focusing on something at 15 feet or so. GOOD LUCK.

If you want sharp, stop down to f16 and below, and either supply lots of light or shoot with a film that doesn't have a reciprocity problem.

 

How are you processing the TMX? Just as an experiment, you might try switching to Delta 100, rating it at 50, and developing in 1:50 Rodinal.

 

Good shooting.

 

/s/ David Beal * Memories Preserved Photography, LLC

I send my negs to a lab to process. They use Xtol dip and dunk. I use a Manfrotto 455 tripod. The shutter speeds aren't usually too slow. I don't recall what it was for these pictures. I will do some more testing. I'm just finding it hard to get good results with this camera. The loupe tells all. I have some 400 speed JandC film, so I may try that. It may be grainy however.

Scott ,,,IMHO I believe its camera movement. The whole photo looks like there was camera movement,where nothing is real sharp. I am not saying the lens is good or bad , I just think you need to give it a fighting chance. Try shooting it outside bright day, at 250th and F11 or 16, and see what it looks like. Did you use a cable release on a sturdy tripod?Are you using a loupe to focus on the ground glass? I would give it another chance.

What aperture are you using? If, as you report, only f/5.6, stop down to f/16 or f/22. Never, never, never shoot any Optar wider than f/11. If you'll visit the Perez/Thalmann lens tests site, you'll see that few LF lenses are usable wider than f/11. Go to http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html , do not pass GO, do not collect $200.

 

Does your focusing panel have a fresnel?

Unfortunately this camera has a few missing parts for the shutter release. I have to trip the little arm to have it go off. There is now place to hook a cable release into it. Its supposed to have a solenoid attached, but it doesn't.

The ground glass has a fresnal I believe- assuming that it means the circular marks on the glass. I never use the focussing aid on the rangefinder part. When I release the camera to open it, I'm not sure where it supposed to sit and lock- so I use the ground glass to tell me when its close. I then lock it, put my jacket over the back so I can see, and fine focus it on the glass. I've never tried using a loupe, but the back hinge doesn't have a tight spring either. I usually have to push on the back to make sure its sitting flush with the body. I'm sure thats where part of the problem may be. I took a few pics close up near f11 or 16 of a typewriter here. That was on FP4. I'll see if those come out ok.

Scott, are you sure there s not a threaded hold on the outside of the shutter where you can use a cable release? I have that lens and mine does,as well as the solenoid.

Thats hole, not hold

There is no cable release socket on the shutter? What kind of shutter do you have the lens mounted to? THe Graphx that my speed graphic came with has a socket on the upper left hand side if you are looking at it from the front just to the left of the cocking lever.

No worries. I found the hole. It works. Testing it the shutter may need some use to loosen it up. I'm not sure if its sticking slightly.

Here's another pic taken during the day, however cloudy.

Aside from the obvioudly slower shutter, I was looking at several things in that photo. First off the part on the right of the frame seems soft. Sort of like focus vignetting. The trees and the apartment buildings look ok, but the people in the far background are soft. Yet they are standing still. Not a perfect example, but this is one of the better ones. The sharpest pic I've noticed is this one below.

Let me know if the last two examples are typical of this lens, or if I could expect better. It may tell me if my technique needs work, or if its just the equipment.

"Unfortunately this camera has a few missing parts for the shutter release. I have to trip the little arm to have it go off. There is now place to hook a cable release into it. Its supposed to have a solenoid attached, but it doesn't."

 

I've been using an Anniversary Speed Graphic and a Super Graphic (assorted lenses) over the last 10 years. I used to "trip the little arm" too. There is a noticable increase in quality using a cable release.

It looks like to me that the area you were focusing on is in focus, are you infinity stops set correctly? Did you use the rangefinder for this shot with the distance scale? Have you checked out the excelent resource for Graflex products www.graflex.org they have a great help board.

I'm not sure where the infinity stops are. I had to self teach myself using this thing. I never use the rangefinder, but only the ground glass to focus. I like to be able to see exactly where its framed.

On the bed of the camera there are two stops they might be folded down, when you use the camera pull the lens out to the infinity stops to shoot here is a link to an owners manual for your camera: http://www.southbristolviews.com/pics/Graphic/manual-pdf/pacemaker.pdf

These are great cameras, half the fun is finding out how to use them.

Also remember your DOF when composing.

I was just noticing something with the Swamp1 picture. There is light falloff in the middle-lower right side of the frame. This is the same area in the Harrison picture that was muddy looking in focus and light. Would there be something that would cause this?

What I see is the girl in the harrison picture to the right is out of focus because she is not in the zone of focus for the lens at the apprature the shot was taken. Also the same for the weeds in the lower right cornor from the swamp picture.