1st images with Linhof III v5 not that sharp...

[DLee]

Hi, I've had a Linhof Technica III v.5 for years and I finally got around to shooting some film with it.

I've been shooting 4x5 sheet and 120 with the 6x9 Rollex back. The first film that I've had processed is the 120 from the Rollex. Sure enough the Rollex overlaps... so I'll be sending it in for a possible adjustment.

The overlap is disappointing but I halfway expected that. What I didn't expect is the image to be kinda soft. Granted all the shots were made handheld and focused with the rangefinder, but there really isn't anything sharp in the image. Real close... but not quite. IF the rangefinder focus was off I would expect to see sharpness in front or behind my subject - but I don't. I didn't use any movements and shutter speeds were kept around 1/250 minimum.

The lenses I have are matched cam with sr. #'s to both camera and lens. I have a Linhof select S/K Xenar 150 4.5 and Linhof select S/K Angulon 90 6.8. I also have a 300 but I haven't shot with that yet. The lenses appear to be uncoated and the same vintage as the camera... mid fifties.

The film is Kodak 400 NC and I had it developed and scanned locally. The scans are OK but not that high a res. Checking the negs with a lupe sharpness appears close but not perfect in the best two (of 8) frames.

Here are my thoughts and questions:

Color neg just isn't that sharp and I should do another test with B&W with the camera on a tripod.

Are negatives just not as sharp as what I've come to expect with digital?

With focus so close... but not quite, could it be back alignment?

Could it be film flatness in the back?

Are the lenses soft?

Do I really suck this badly at photography?

I guess the next step is to do a real focus test with the camera on a tripod and shoot both 120 and 4x5... and process the 4x5, ha.

Sorry for the long ramble here. I know there's testing to be done... I was just so looking forward to seeing this film. To have it come back overlapped, soft and frankly... boring... is more than a little disappointing. I fear it's taking a little wind outa my sails for LF... but, not giving up yet. I'll mix some chemistry this weekend and see how the 4x5s look.

Any thoughts appreciated.

Thanks, Dennis

[vinny]

put it on a tripod
focus using the ground glass (on some newspaper or something with fine detail)
shoot some 4x5's
check the rangefinder and see if the focus matches
process them and use a good loupe to check the results

it could be the ground glass was replaced incorrectly or something like that but not as likely

[Rollinhofuji]

I agree with Vinny. Furthermore, make sure the lenses are stopped down at least to f11, better f16-22. At these values, they should give best results.

[djdister]

I agree with Vinny. Furthermore, make sure the lenses are stopped down at least to f11, better f16-22. At these values, they should give best results.

If you are doing a sharpness test, wouldn't you want to keep the aperture closer to wide open? Shooting at f22 wouldn't tell you if what you focused on is actually in focus. But Vinny's advice is right on...

[Peter Gomena]

I can almost guarantee that anyone's first experience with a LF camera will be frustrating or disappointing. (Fascinating results, perhaps, but usually not perfect!) There's a big learning curve and a dozen ways to go wrong on any one exposure. It takes time and practice to work the mistakes out of your routine. Once the painstaking parts become intuitive, your average will improve.

It wouldn't surprise me a bit if you find your rangefinder out-of-synch with ground glass focus. It surprises me even less that hand-holding a 4x5 gave you fuzzy results. Vinny and Rollinhofuji have it right, take their advice.

And don't give up!! The results are worth the effort.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Don't bother repairing the Rollex back. That's how it is. It was made for film that was thicker or maybe had thicker paper behind it, and it doesn't actually measure the film travel like the later Super-Rollex backs, so it can't compensate for the difference in film/backing thickness. You may find some films that work with an old Rollex back, but you'll have to experiment.

Long ago I posted about this issue either here or on apug.org, and if you can locate the old thread, there may be some info there about what modern films will work with a Rollex back.

[Bob Salomon]

All of your lenses are coated. They are not multi-coated. Your back requires a minor modification, if the parts are still available then Nippon Photoclinic in NYC can modify it for modern films.

[coisasdavida]

My first experiences with my Tech III were the same.
Later I found out I had to really use the focus lock before taking my eyes out of the rangefinder.
That solved most of my problems.

But I went through what Vinny suggested first.

[Bernice Loui]

Coated or un coated, in this case there may be zero difference in sharpness. There are many, many images from before 1900 made with un coated lenses and they produced SHARP images..

+1
on Vinny's recommendation.

Put the camera on a tripod, focus using the ground glass and a magnifier (loupe), carefully install the film holder, gently pull the dark slide allow everything to settle and release the shutter with a CABLE RELEASE...

Hand held 4x5 is not the best way to figure out lens/camera performance of sheet film camera system. Do not treat a 4x5 press camera like a hand held digital, not gonna work.

Do not get discouraged, figure out what went wrong step by step one at a time. There rewards will be there.



Bernice




Hi, I've had a Linhof Technica III v.5 for years and I finally got around to shooting some film with it.

I've been shooting 4x5 sheet and 120 with the 6x9 Rollex back. The first film that I've had processed is the 120 from the Rollex. Sure enough the Rollex overlaps... so I'll be sending it in for a possible adjustment.

The overlap is disappointing but I halfway expected that. What I didn't expect is the image to be kinda soft. Granted all the shots were made handheld and focused with the rangefinder, but there really isn't anything sharp in the image. Real close... but not quite. IF the rangefinder focus was off I would expect to see sharpness in front or behind my subject - but I don't. I didn't use any movements and shutter speeds were kept around 1/250 minimum.

The lenses I have are matched cam with sr. #'s to both camera and lens. I have a Linhof select S/K Xenar 150 4.5 and Linhof select S/K Angulon 90 6.8. I also have a 300 but I haven't shot with that yet. The lenses appear to be uncoated and the same vintage as the camera... mid fifties.

The film is Kodak 400 NC and I had it developed and scanned locally. The scans are OK but not that high a res. Checking the negs with a lupe sharpness appears close but not perfect in the best two (of 8) frames.

Here are my thoughts and questions:

Color neg just isn't that sharp and I should do another test with B&W with the camera on a tripod.

Are negatives just not as sharp as what I've come to expect with digital?

With focus so close... but not quite, could it be back alignment?

Could it be film flatness in the back?

Are the lenses soft?

Do I really suck this badly at photography?

I guess the next step is to do a real focus test with the camera on a tripod and shoot both 120 and 4x5... and process the 4x5, ha.

Sorry for the long ramble here. I know there's testing to be done... I was just so looking forward to seeing this film. To have it come back overlapped, soft and frankly... boring... is more than a little disappointing. I fear it's taking a little wind outa my sails for LF... but, not giving up yet. I'll mix some chemistry this weekend and see how the 4x5s look.

Any thoughts appreciated.

Thanks, Dennis

[tangyimail]

i agree with Vinny. Use ground glass rather than the rangefinder. So many things can go wrong with the rangefinder, such as a bent cam

[Liquid Artist]

Following the above advice should give you good results.

Plus I'll add my own and say start processing your own film asap.
You would not believe how many labs reuse the chemistry until there is just nothing left. I used to work in 1, and had to wait almost a year after I started before I would process my own.

Plus like everyone says, Don't get discouraged.

I blew my first 4 frames by just rushing. (I took the dark slide out twice before closing the shutter, the dark slide once pealed the film out of the holder, and I set the shutter speed once but left the aperture wide open)
Since I only had 2 film holders and drove 2 hours for the shots it was a little heartbreaking.
However now I rarely pull out anything smaller than 4x5, and also rarely completely blow shots. If I do I have enough loaded film with me.

[Lenny Eiger]

If you are doing a sharpness test, wouldn't you want to keep the aperture closer to wide open? Shooting at f22 wouldn't tell you if what you focused on is actually in focus. But Vinny's advice is right on...

The effects of diffusion are extremely minimal. This has been discussed many times here. The difference between f22 and f45 is pretty much non-existent, with current technology, and large format lenses.

Enjoy the depth of field!


Lenny

[DLee]

Alright, not giving up yet... Made four exposures today. With camera on tripod I was happy to see a very sharp image on the ground glass. I made two exposures at f 4.5, one 4x5 and one Rollex 6x9. Checked focus after each and then shot two more frames similarly at f11.

Checked the GG after and still had a sharp image... now to process.

Checking the rangefinder against the ground glass I found that there was a bit of variation of focus alignment determined by the angle of view into the rangefinder. I was focusing at about six feet and eventually determined that with the proper angle the rangefinder was dead on. Focusing at thirty feet though didn't achieve the same affect right off the bat. After moving my eye around the finder again I did come up with a pretty accurate rangefinder/GG comparison. So I guess there is a little bit of learning curve to the rangefinder as well.

I'll be surprised if the process of slowing down today does not yield better results. I made sure the tripod was well locked down, used the focus lock, used a cable release and calmly and carefully loaded the different film backs.

I'll report back when I see the results. Thanks for the advice and encouragement.

Fingers crossed,

Dennis

[StoneNYC]

Just know, if you are scanning, the difference between a drum scan and a flatbed scan is tremendous and you will most likely be disappointed in the sharpness if you are looking at a flatbed scan and used to high quality digital. Also keep in mind it depends on the development process, type of developer used, technique, film used, etc, B&W grain structure and contrast will all change greatly depending on your process.