PDA

View Full Version : Focus problems Toyo View D45M



photojpg
26-Mar-2019, 14:21
Hello,All,

I have a Toyo View D45M which I have written about before. I have been able to get my back focus problem fixed I believe. But My photos all seem to lack sharpness. I am new to 4x5 so maybe i'm used to how medium format negatives look as far as sharpness goes. All my 4x5 negatives no matter the film or film holder used seem to lack sharpness. They dont really look out of focus but they all look rather soft to me. I have a Rodenstock sironar N 210mm 5.6 and a Calumet Caltar II 90mm 6.8 as well as a Fujinon W 150mm 5.6. Do 4x5 look different under a loupe due to their size? it could also be due to my newness to focusing a LF camera. But all my negatives seem this way with every lens.

Also when printed in the darkroom my prints exhibit the same problem. Does anyone have any tips on focusing LF negatives in the darkroom? the lack of grain makes it hard for me.

Bob Salomon
26-Mar-2019, 14:32
What are you using to focus? An adjustable opaque loupe? A clear print loupe? No loupe?

If you are using a properly adjusted loupe is your film properly inserted in your film holder?

Is any area of your film sharp?

Are you shooting at optimal aperture of your lens, f22?

What tripod are you using?

Are you in the Bay Area? If so show Looking Glass what your results are.
Are you closer to Walnut Creek? If so show Camera West.
Are you in SF? Show Bear Images.
Are you closer to San Jose? Show San Jose Camera.

Paul Ron
26-Mar-2019, 14:35
perhaps its a DOF problem? what f-stops are you using?

is your tripod sturdy enough?

photojpg
26-Mar-2019, 15:18
I'm using a Peak 5x loupe with a clear long barrell. I have been using F22 or F32 for most photos. I have double checked the film is loaded properly in my holders. I have a sturdy tripod and a large Ball head. There have been a few photos that had sharp areas but most dont, even ones that should be easy to focus flat objects head on. I have only gotten 2 negatives I consider acceptable a test of text on a flat cardboard box and text on a large water bottle next to it. These came out extremely sharp but they were close up as well. Even with the same film fp4+ i have not gotten the same sharpness other places. I plan on taking them into my local camera shop in Santa Rosa, CA, he will be able to look at them and hopefully let me know if it is just me or the camera. It seems like at f22 and f32 some should be sharper.

Bob Salomon
26-Mar-2019, 16:05
I'm using a Peak 5x loupe with a clear long barrell. I have been using F22 or F32 for most photos. I have double checked the film is loaded properly in my holders. I have a sturdy tripod and a large Ball head. There have been a few photos that had sharp areas but most dont, even ones that should be easy to focus flat objects head on. I have only gotten 2 negatives I consider acceptable a test of text on a flat cardboard box and text on a large water bottle next to it. These came out extremely sharp but they were close up as well. Even with the same film fp4+ i have not gotten the same sharpness other places. I plan on taking them into my local camera shop in Santa Rosa, CA, he will be able to look at them and hopefully let me know if it is just me or the camera. It seems like at f22 and f32 some should be sharper.

Jeremiah?

B.S.Kumar
27-Mar-2019, 06:35
1. Use black tape around the clear barrel of the loupe to block extraneous light.
2. I trust you are using a dark cloth.
3. Take some photos of objects with sharp lines - a building across the street, for example or the closeup photos you took earlier at wider apertures - f/8 or f/11. That should help identify the problem.

Kumar

Pere Casals
27-Mar-2019, 07:41
Does anyone have any tips on focusing LF negatives in the darkroom? the lack of grain makes it hard for me.

1) Take the Sironar N 210, print this target http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/USAF.pdf, check that thickness of the printed lines are matching the right values in this table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_USAF_resolution_test_chart , If you print 100% size (on A4) it should match.

and place it place at 10m, frame the target in the center, focus at f/5.6, then stop to f/16 and take a shot with TMX, expose in a way that a white paper close to the target is overexposed 3 stops.

With a strong loupe, in the negative locate group -1:

189267

You should see if bars are horizontal or vertical in several elements of group -1 (at 10m with the 210)

You my learn how resolving power is calculated, but if group -1 is well recorded at 10m (with the 210) then your taking is good, with an Image quality depending on the element you see well (discerning if lines are hor or vert).

A Sironar N 210 may deliver up to effective 75 line pairs per mm, so Group 0 may also be seen, this tells that your negatives have an image quality equivalent to around 300 MPix digital. Once in a lifetime you may check if your taking in sharp, just to know if you are able to exploit LF capability or if you may improve something.


2) A view camera may have a film plane to Ground Glass missmatch. Often this is provocated in the next sequence: The view camera has a broken GG with a Fresnel installed in the inner side, then someone replaces that by a regular GG with no fresnel and sells the camera. Then the Film to GG matching in not right and it has to be adjusted.


3) You can also place a DSLR (without the DSLR lens) in the back of the view camera, you can take a shot and enlarge in the DSLR screen to see the group/element, if this test is good but the film shot resolves remarkably less then the film plane to GG has to be adjusted.


4) You can also check that adjustment by taking shot os a ruler on the ground, place focus to a certain Number on the ruler and then see in the negative if the right focus is farther or nearer than the NUmber yo focused on.


5) If the negative is sharp, then in the enlarger first check that the center is sharp: focus in the center wide open, close two stops and check it. If corners are not sharp then enlarger requires to be aligned. You may use this method to measure your resolving power: https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?151265-9000-dpi-effective-DSLR-scanner&p=1490131&viewfull=1#post1490131

You may purchase a glass slide for that, search ebay for: usaf 1951 glass slide

you may make an offer under $60

Bob Salomon
27-Mar-2019, 08:20
1) Take the Sironar N 210, print this target http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/USAF.pdf, check that thickness of the printed lines are matching the right values in this table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_USAF_resolution_test_chart , If you print 100% size (on A4) it should match.

and place it place at 10m, frame the target in the center, focus at f/5.6, then stop to f/16 and take a shot with TMX, expose in a way that a white paper close to the target is overexposed 3 stops.

With a strong loupe, in the negative locate group -1:

189267

You should see if bars are horizontal or vertical in several elements of group -1 (at 10m with the 210)

You my learn how resolving power is calculated, but if group -1 is well recorded at 10m (with the 210) then your taking is good, with an Image quality depending on the element you see well (discerning if lines are hor or vert).

A Sironar N 210 may deliver up to effective 75 line pairs per mm, so Group 0 may also be seen, this tells that your negatives have an image quality equivalent to around 300 MPix digital. Once in a lifetime you may check if your taking in sharp, just to know if you are able to exploit LF capability or if you may improve something.


2) A view camera may have a film plane to Ground Glass missmatch. Often this is provocated in the next sequence: The view camera has a broken GG with a Fresnel installed in the inner side, then someone replaces that by a regular GG with no fresnel and sells the camera. Then the Film to GG matching in not right and it has to be adjusted.


3) You can also place a DSLR (without the DSLR lens) in the back of the view camera, you can take a shot and enlarge in the DSLR screen to see the group/element, if this test is good but the film shot resolves remarkably less then the film plane to GG has to be adjusted.


4) You can also check that adjustment by taking shot os a ruler on the ground, place focus to a certain Number on the ruler and then see in the negative if the right focus is farther or nearer than the NUmber yo focused on.


5) If the negative is sharp, then in the enlarger first check that the center is sharp: focus in the center wide open, close two stops and check it. If corners are not sharp then enlarger requires to be aligned. You may use this method to measure your resolving power: https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?151265-9000-dpi-effective-DSLR-scanner&p=1490131&viewfull=1#post1490131

You may purchase a glass slide for that, search ebay for: usaf 1951 glass slide

you may make an offer under $60

1 a process lens is designed to photograph flat art work, not his lens
2 his lens has an optimal aperture ar 22, not 16!

Pere Casals
27-Mar-2019, 08:28
1 a process lens is designed to photograph flat art work, not his lens


Bob, this is a procedure to check if the OP's taking has a flaw or not. At 10m the 210mm sironar works around 1:50 magnification, and target only takes the image center, so it's irrelevant if field is flat or not.

2)if stopping too much then DOF will extend in a way that a GG to film plane missmatch would not be detected. Perhaps this test should be also repeated at f/8 or f/11, or wide open if cheking focus with a ruler on the ground (point 4)...




2 his lens has an optimal aperture ar 22, not 16!

Bob, probably this depends on the particular sample. Those samples having a higher spheric aberrations probably will improve until f/22, but those samples that are very good probably would be worse at f/22 than at f/16.

rdeloe
27-Mar-2019, 18:48
For the OP, I have another line of attack for you to consider in getting to the bottom of your issue.

First of all, I have this exact camera. Mine is the black version, which means early 1970s vintage. I also have a set of the older "putty" coloured standards that I bought for parts. There are no differences that I can see beyond the colour.

The Toyo D45M a terrific piece of equipment and well worth fixing. It may be "old" and lacking some of the features and designs of more recent view cameras, but I love it. It's relatively light at around 7.5 lbs. OK, not light compared to some of the lovely modern field cameras or the super-light Toho view camera. But it's certainly lighter than its G series descendants. It doesn't weigh a lot more than many peoples' dream camera, the Toyo VX125. It also doesn't hurt that it's dirt cheap. I overpaid for my black one because the condition was so good, and it was still only $318 USD shipped from Japan to Canada.

One of the things that I love about this camera is that it was made for professionals. That means everything is adjustable because in heavy professional use, things go out of alignment and often need to be adjusted. That gets me to my first suggestion: have you measured to see whether or not your standards are out of alignment? Mine were. Even though the camera was very lightly used and in excellent condition, they were still out of alignment; for instance, the rear standard had a couple degrees of swing on it, even though it showed as being in the zero position. Needless to say if the standards are out of alignment, you're not going to get sharp images under some circumstances.

The fix for this problem may be very easy: with an Allen key and a bit of adjust-measure-adjust my standard was back to being in perfect alignment. If you're interested I can post some pics that show all the adjustment points I used.

My second suggestion picks up on a post you made in another thread regarding the Fresnel lens. Did you ever sort out whether or not you had it in the right position? I took my ground glass assembly apart to clean it. There were no shims or adjustments. Once I had it back together, I shot some test shots against my lens testing setup to make sure I hadn't misaligned the lens relative to the film plane. All elements of the test chart are as sharp as they should be across the entire frame.

My final suggestion is to consider the lens. You may have ruled this out already, but are you getting poor results from all your lenses -- or is it just one?

Keith Fleming
27-Mar-2019, 20:53
The OP, just to be sure, might try using a standard lead pencil to make an "X" in the center of the frosted side of the ground glass. The X will provide a useful target for making sure the loupe itself is properly adjusted. Just focus the loupe until the pencil mark is at maximum sharpness. I do this, and also use gaffers tape to make sure my loupe stays in focus. I check the loupe's focus each time I go out to photograph.

Keith

Bob Salomon
28-Mar-2019, 05:56
The OP, just to be sure, might try using a standard lead pencil to make an "X" in the center of the frosted side of the ground glass. The X will provide a useful target for making sure the loupe itself is properly adjusted. Just focus the loupe until the pencil mark is at maximum sharpness. I do this, and also use gaffers tape to make sure my loupe stays in focus. I check the loupe's focus each time I go out to photograph.

Keith

Just take off the les, point the camera at any bright area and focus the loupe till the gg grain is sharp. It should then be equally sharp at any point on the gg if the standards are square to each other.

jose angel
28-Mar-2019, 10:49
Well, let me to add some thoughts, maybe it`s not your case.
-First of all, if you're used to digital, think that some find film soft looking by comparison.
-Your loupe is fine, as long as it is adjusted for your eyesight.
-If you have "lack of grain" at the enlarger, it could happen that your film is too soft (no contrast), your light source is also low, or the lens is not contrasty enough wide open for an easy view.
-Of course, everything must be clean and perfectly aligned (camera and enlarger), lenses used at optimal settings, etc. If not, sharpness is merely matter of luck.
-What about the film/developer? Acutance increases sharpness perception. Lack of acutance look soft.

Jac@stafford.net
28-Mar-2019, 11:47
The OP, just to be sure, might try using a standard lead pencil to make an "X" in the center of the frosted side of the ground glass.

Or drill a hole through the ground glass center and try aerial focusing. A cheap glass burr will do the trick. They are okay for one use, then just throw it away when done.

photojpg
29-Mar-2019, 16:17
Thank you to everyone for your answers and tips, I will try them this weekend if I have time. I do know that the GG and Fresnel are installed correctly, as per the instructions from Toyo. I also had the same problems without the fresnel. I do take longish exposures at times, 1-3 seconds not sure if the film reciprocity is an issue with sharpness?

Pere Casals
29-Mar-2019, 16:56
if the film reciprocity is an issue with sharpness?

No... LIRF may only led to an underexposed negative or loss in the shadow detail, but if your exposure is ok...

at 2-3 seconds LIRF should be very low.

photojpg
15-Apr-2019, 07:36
Hi Again,

I was still having the problem after trying peoples suggestions. I got a super good deal on a Sinar F2 with everything, Bag bellows case etc. Cleaned it up and tried out some photos this weekend and they came out sharp like they should be. I used the same lenses 210, 90 and 150 all Rodenstock. Also the same tripod and head as well as the same film and developer as before. I can only assume that there was something wrong with the back on the toyo or some other defect in its equipment. It's too bad as it had more features that the Sinar but it is primarily a camera for the studio. The Sinar F2 is better suited for what I want in a camera, lighter, easily packable and easier to break down for transport. I have a Lowepro pro trekker AW I just got for $20 and I can easily fit the Sinar and accessories in it. That woukd have been near impossible with the Toyo plus it is much heavier. Now I have to sell the Toyo somehow and a brand new Tenba car case I got for it.

Bernice Loui
15-Apr-2019, 08:28
Based on the description, problem with the Toyo could be the distance between film holder seating area to ground glass. This distance is critical to producing proper focus from what is observed on the ground glass to the film in the film holder.

-Does the Toyo have a fresnel and it is properly positioned?

As for the Toyo having more "features" than the Sinar F2, does the Toyo really have more features given the Sinar is a broadly compatible system from Norma to Sinar P2 and more. Your Sinar F2 can be up or down graded depending on image making needs. To change from 4x5 to 5x7 to 8x10 is essentially sliding off the rear standard and bellows then sliding on the rear standard of film or digital format of choice. If geared camera movements are needed, apply Sinar P or P2 standards with the frames as needed on to the basic rail. Then there is the Sinar Shutter allowing the use of many lenses without shutter. Masking lens shades, filter holders and a LOT more are easily available and fully useable on your Sinar F2. Due to the large number of Sinar and Sinar camera accessories sold these accessories are not too difficult to find and purchase.



Bernice



Hi Again,

I was still having the problem after trying peoples suggestions. I got a super good deal on a Sinar F2 with everything, Bag bellows case etc. Cleaned it up and tried out some photos this weekend and they came out sharp like they should be. I used the same lenses 210, 90 and 150 all Rodenstock. Also the same tripod and head as well as the same film and developer as before. I can only assume that there was something wrong with the back on the toyo or some other defect in its equipment. It's too bad as it had more features that the Sinar but it is primarily a camera for the studio. The Sinar F2 is better suited for what I want in a camera, lighter, easily packable and easier to break down for transport. I have a Lowepro pro trekker AW I just got for $20 and I can easily fit the Sinar and accessories in it. That woukd have been near impossible with the Toyo plus it is much heavier. Now I have to sell the Toyo somehow and a brand new Tenba car case I got for it.

rdeloe
15-Apr-2019, 09:48
Congrats on a good deal on a terrific camera system!

I'm curious about your thought that the F2 was lighter, easily packable and easier to break down for transport compared to the Toyo D45M. When I looked at the F2 I was seeing weights in the 3.3 kg range. My D45M comes in at 3.55 kg with the short rail, standard bellows, adapter board, tripod foot and a Manfrotto adapter plate for the 410 head. The compendium adds a bit more weight, as do the extension rails (which are steel).

Here's my D45M inside a little Gura Gear Kiboko 22L backpack. It's wearing the compendium and a lens. I take the foot off so the camera slides into the space better; the foot is stored in that little pouch. Altogether, it's no lightweight, that's for sure. But it's quite packable. I can get my lenses in there too, but it's not convenient. I regret selling my own Lowepro Pro Trekker AW. You've inspired me to see if I can find one for $20 too!

Enjoy your camera.

Here's the D45M in profile. It's wearing the compendium and the standard bellows. I'm replacing the bellows with a new set that are thinner and lighter; I had to coat this set liberally with RTV to plug all the light leaks, so now it doesn't compress properly.

190077

This is the camera (in the position shown above, minus foot) inside the backpack.

190078

And here's the closed-up Gura Gear Kiboko 22 L.

190079


Hi Again,

I was still having the problem after trying peoples suggestions. I got a super good deal on a Sinar F2 with everything, Bag bellows case etc. Cleaned it up and tried out some photos this weekend and they came out sharp like they should be. I used the same lenses 210, 90 and 150 all Rodenstock. Also the same tripod and head as well as the same film and developer as before. I can only assume that there was something wrong with the back on the toyo or some other defect in its equipment. It's too bad as it had more features that the Sinar but it is primarily a camera for the studio. The Sinar F2 is better suited for what I want in a camera, lighter, easily packable and easier to break down for transport. I have a Lowepro pro trekker AW I just got for $20 and I can easily fit the Sinar and accessories in it. That woukd have been near impossible with the Toyo plus it is much heavier. Now I have to sell the Toyo somehow and a brand new Tenba car case I got for it.