Is this camera focusing correctly? / Rolleiflex 3.5 F Planar

[stephen_mcateer]

Back to my Rolleiflex 3.5F Planar again: I'm wondering if it's focusing correctly.

If I zoom in on the attached image, the main subject — a Poplar tree — seems not quite as sharp as the leaves intruding on the image at left.

Note: I cropped the image to about 1/3 of the original area so that if fit the file size limit here.

Technical details:

• Kodak Portra 400
• Oleson focus screen
• From memory, f8 at about 1/60 or 1/125 (Or thereabouts)
• Hand-held
• Scanned on an Epson 4990 flatbed
• Camera had a CLA late last year

Thanks for your opinion.

 

[stephen_mcateer]

Update — the image here on photo.net is not well-displayed.

A larger file is here if you wish to see it properly: https://stephenmcateer.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/img484-copy-scaled.jpg 

Edited May 20 by stephen_mcateer
Correction

[kmac]

Hi Stephen, Viewing your linked image, I'd say your Rolleiflex is focusing OK. I think you need to start at the negative though. Displayed images on the Internet inhibits  assessing the true sharpness of images on your film.

Poor quality exposure and development can affect the quality of the images. Make sure your films are properly developed before checking them, and select images that appear to be well exposed.

I bought a Portable Slide Scanner 5 x 4 Inches LED Light Panel on the Bay to check my negs, viewing them with a magnifying glass. I can tell straight away if a neg is worth scanning or not. The prices of those particular Light Panels vary, so don't get caught out paying an over-the-top price, if you decide to buy one.

You can also lose the true sharpness of an image by using an old scanner and software. To check a neg, you'll need a scan of at least 4,000 DPI resolution. But checking the neg itself is the method I use now - before I do any scanning.

 

 

 

[John Seaman]

The  focus looks OK to me. the slight overall fuzziness is more likely to be down to scanning issues.

[stephen_mcateer]

51 minutes ago, John Seaman said:

The  focus looks OK to me. the slight overall fuzziness is more likely to be down to scanning issues.

Thanks John. I think you're probably right about the scanner — I need to figure out how to check / adjust its focus. I'll research that today. Cheers.

[stephen_mcateer]

2 hours ago, kmac said:

Hi Stephen, Viewing your linked image, I'd say your Rolleiflex is focusing OK. I think you need to start at the negative though. Displayed images on the Internet inhibits  assessing the true sharpness of images on your film.

Poor quality exposure and development can affect the quality of the images. Make sure your films are properly developed before checking them, and select images that appear to be well exposed.

I bought a Portable Slide Scanner 5 x 4 Inches LED Light Panel on the Bay to check my negs, viewing them with a magnifying glass. I can tell straight away if a neg is worth scanning or not. The prices of those particular Light Panels vary, so don't get caught out paying an over-the-top price, if you decide to buy one.

You can also lose the true sharpness of an image by using an old scanner and software. To check a neg, you'll need a scan of at least 4,000 DPI resolution. But checking the neg itself is the method I use now - before I do any scanning.

 

 

 

Thanks kmac.

I sent the film off to a lab for development, so I'm assuming the dev is okay.

Exposure — I used my Minolta Autometer IV to take an incident reading, though from experience that's not a 100% guarantee of correct exposure.

I have a Kaiser LED panel — I have to say I don't use it to critically evaluate the negs before scanning though, I just tend to scan anything that looks like a reasonable composition (Which can lead to scanning dud images).

I think you're right about old scanners — the maximum optical resolution of this one is apparently 2400 DPI. (I like the 'Soft' light from its fluorescent tube versus LED scanners , which look a bit harsh to me). 

As I said to John Seaman, above, I think I need to find out how to correct for scanner focusing errors. 

Cheers.

 

 

[John Seaman]

10 minutes ago, stephen_mcateer said:

the maximum optical resolution of this one is apparently 2400 DPI

What scanner, is it a flatbed? The claimed resolution of those is generally found to be highly optimistic. At 2400 dpi it sounds old, later scanners have much higher claimed resolutions. A better result result might be achieved by photographing the negative on a light box using a macro lens.

[stephen_mcateer]

2 minutes ago, John Seaman said:

What scanner, is it a flatbed? The claimed resolution of those is generally found to be highly optimistic. At 2400 dpi it sounds old, later scanners have much higher claimed resolutions. A better result result might be achieved by photographing the negative on a light box using a macro lens.

Yes it's a flatbed John. And it is old — maybe 15 years or more.

I do have a DSLR and light box which I've used before for 'Scanning' negs but I find the flatbed simpler. (I don't have space to have the DSLR rig set up permanently.)

I think I'll check the focus on the flatbed as a first step.

I think you're right in saying, though, that photographing negs gives sharper results.

 

 

[Ken Katz]

Hand held, normal lens field of view, and 1/60th does not seem ideal for the for a test of sharpness or focus.  1/125 is certainly better, but also not ideal for the task.  Back in my day of shooting film, a decent loop and a light box would be an enormous help. 

[stephen_mcateer]

2 hours ago, Ken Katz said:

Hand held, normal lens field of view, and 1/60th does not seem ideal for the for a test of sharpness or focus.  1/125 is certainly better, but also not ideal for the task.  Back in my day of shooting film, a decent loop and a light box would be an enormous help. 

You make a good point Ken. I should put the camera on a tripod in good light and see if things look any different. Looking at this image again, it does look slightly soft to me — putting it on the tripod would at least rule out camera shake being the cause. Thanks.

[Robin Smith]

For 50mm and 35mm film equivalent 1/250 was the minimum shutter speed to be assured of good sharpness to avoid camera shake. I would anticipate a similar finding for a 75mm lens on 6x6.

[stephen_mcateer]

On 5/28/2024 at 5:50 AM, Robin Smith said:

For 50mm and 35mm film equivalent 1/250 was the minimum shutter speed to be assured of good sharpness to avoid camera shake. I would anticipate a similar finding for a 75mm lens on 6x6.

Thanks for that Robin.