Easy Testing Used LF Lenses?

[Tin Can]

Yesterday I posted 2 unsharp 5X7 neg scans Here (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?57170-In-Praise-of-5x7-Post-em-!&p=1527126&viewfull=1#post1527126)

My question is, how can we quickly test a used lens for sharpness?

I may not be able to literally see the problem, with my vision on a GG, even with a 9X loupe

I was and am aware of how unsharp the 2 images are. I processed both with 4 other 5X7 negs shot with a SF lens. Those cannot be posted. They are far sharper.

As I 'see' it, 3 primary variables are GG T, alignment of standards and the lens

All my lenses are second hand 'bargains' some bought here but most from a 1960's estate

Not trying to assign blame

A thought and caution to others, it was common for Pros to test any lens with a few iterations and return the chaff

Buy beware

[Greg]

For every lens I have acquired I do an initial simple lens test of the same scene. Location 1 with the factory buildings if the weather is nice, location 2 of the center of our town when the weather is not so nice... taken from an elevated porch with a roof over my head and shielded from the wind. Always focus on the sign in one location and the stop sign in the other. Usually shoot at f/32. Both scenes include signs or license plates or other objects that practically allow me to judge the sharpness of the lens. Both locations are within a 2 minute drive from my house. From unpacking a lens, to leaving my house, to hanging up a negative to dry takes way less than an hour. When the negatives are dry, I mark the film edge with the lens used, f/stop, date taken, and other notes. This just simply works for me.

[Daniel Unkefer]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49078896253_8833033949_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2hLWaYr)First 5x7 Norma Test 75f8 SA CF E3 150F9 Aristo2 Perfection 3.5min (https://flic.kr/p/2hLWaYr) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

When I was young I generally followed Fred Picker's advice, as well as Gordon Hutchings.

Tree branches make good resolution targets. This is a Sinar Norma 75mm F8 Super Angulon barrel/rabbit ears with matching Schneider Center Filter (marked Center Filter for 75mm F8 SA).
5x7" Norma

Obviously I was interested in the outer edges of the circle. Used to use a lot of extreme rise all the time. NP with Norma superiority! :)

Also test of Omega E3 with Omegalite and glass carrier.

[Andrew Tymon]

Yesterday I posted 2 unsharp 5X7 neg scans Here (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?57170-In-Praise-of-5x7-Post-em-!&p=1527126&viewfull=1#post1527126)

My question is, how can we quickly test a used lens for sharpness?

I may not be able to literally see the problem, with my vision on a GG, even with a 9X loupe

I was and am aware of how unsharp the 2 images are. I processed both with 4 other 5X7 negs shot with a SF lens. Those cannot be posted. They are far sharper.

As I 'see' it, 3 primary variables are GG T, alignment of standards and the lens

All my lenses are second hand 'bargains' some bought here but most from a 1960's estate

Not trying to assign blame

A thought and caution to others, it was common for Pros to test any lens with a few iterations and return the chaff

Buy beware

What lens, aperture and dev did you use?

[goamules]

Yesterday I posted 2 unsharp 5X7 neg scans Here (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?57170-In-Praise-of-5x7-Post-em-!&p=1527126&viewfull=1#post1527126)

My question is, how can we quickly test a used lens for sharpness?...A thought and caution to others, it was common for Pros to test any lens with a few iterations and return the chaff

Buy beware

What kind of motion blur did the concussion of a fired canon give? How stable was the tripod, and how far from the muzzle blast?

Just rhetorical questions.

[neil poulsen]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49078896253_8833033949_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2hLWaYr)First 5x7 Norma Test 75f8 SA CF E3 150F9 Aristo2 Perfection 3.5min (https://flic.kr/p/2hLWaYr) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

When I was young I generally followed Fred Picker's advice, as well as Gordon Hutchings.

Tree branches make good resolution targets. This is a Sinar Norma 75mm F8 Super Angulon barrel/rabbit ears with matching Schneider Center Filter (marked Center Filter for 75mm F8 SA).
5x7" Norma

Obviously I was interested in the outer edges of the circle. Used to use a lot of extreme rise all the time. NP with Norma superiority! :)

Also test of Omega E3 with Omegalite and glass carrier.

I've always relied on name brand lenses to ensure sharpness, Schneider, Nikon, Rodenstock and Fuji.

I like Picker's advice. It provides a means to check the sharpness of a lens.

But, I can't help thinking that sharpness is overrated. There are so many other attributes that contribute to a good photograph, like composition, tonality, highlight and shadow rendition, print color, etc. By sticking to name brands and lens formulae, I tend to assume that lenses will be sharp. But, you sure can't assume these other attributes. They really take effort to achieve.

To be fair though, I tend to print on 8x10 paper. If I printed larger, I might take sharpness more seriously. I think that lack of sharpness can detract from an image. But, does it really ever contribute to an image?

[Mark Sawyer]

Personally, I'd shoot a paper negative.

[Tin Can]

Thanks for all the replies. I am going to find or setup a repeatable target and reshoot this lens and film in the next few days. 2 ways, GG as is and reversed. Also fresher film.

Lens is Calter IIE 150mm f6.3 like new. I have shot this lens on 4X5 with good results. The camera in LN condition, Premo SR 5X7 with no light leaks. But it did come with a smashed GG which I replaced with DIY. My DIY GG work fine on other cameras. But I think I have seen this type camera with GG ground and focus side installed away from the lens. T is impossible to measure due to the way the camera is assembled with internal GG. Getting at it from the lens side is also tough.

The image was shot at f22 1/30th cloudy shade. Metered 200 iso, heavy tripod. Tri X 320 processed by gas burst Rodinol 1/50 14 min 70 F per Mass Dev. HP5 from same dunk looks good too.

Focus was the wheel spokes.

Garrett, I didn't notice recoil, but maybe. No round loaded, I think he said 1lb powder and normal was 10 lb powder with load. I may be wrong. The powder was a palm of his hand small bag. Distance to cannon perhaps 30 ft.

The film was poorly stored, I have 3 more holders of it, They were all loaded 3 years ago, put in non conditioned storage and recently brought in house.

Yet other film from the same conditions seems fine and all processed negs look fine.

Video of a similar cannon and recoil. https://youtu.be/EL13quhcUMw This definitely did not occur. It was loud, the girl very nervous and shaky.

The setup neg is similar...

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Years ago I made resolution tests of all of my lenses using a resolution chart. It was an interesting practice, and prompted me to get rid of a few lenses which did not perform very well. It also prompted me to think about aperture in a different way than I had been before, and now try to shoot at f11 or f16 whenever possible. I don't bother any longer doing a formal test, but take a picture of my backyard at f8 and make sure the little branches are still sharp.

[goamules]

...

Garrett, I didn't notice recoil, but maybe. No round loaded, I think he said 1lb powder and normal was 10 lb powder with load. I may be wrong. The powder was a palm of his hand small bag. Distance to cannon perhaps 30 ft.

The film was poorly stored, I have 3 more holders of it, They were all loaded 3 years ago, put in non conditioned storage and recently brought in house.

Yet other film from the same conditions seems fine and all processed negs look fine.

Video of a similar cannon and recoil. https://youtu.be/EL13quhcUMw This definitely did not occur. It was loud, the girl very nervous and shaky.

The setup neg is similar...

Let me clarify: the blast, (sonic concussion) from a canon going off is enough to rattle a camera. You'll see it at times in the video you posted, everything shakes as it passes the camera, even on a tripod. So depending on when you tripped the shutter on the "not sharp" shot (which looks to me milliseconds after the gun fired) you could have gotten some camera shake - an less sharp image. It also matters if you are behind the gun, or to the side of it (much more muzzle blast).

Taking a photo when the concussion hits makes a less sharp photo. The next shot slightly before or after makes a sharper photo.

[LabRat]

When I was sorting through a box of junk optics and wanted a quick idea of how sharp/contrasty/and color correction, I would sit about 6' away from a TV, a good loupe in one hand, and test lens in the other... I would hold up the lens towards the TV, and with the loupe would find the aerial image point where the raster on the screen would focus...

I would clearly see how sharp the edges of the pixels were, or if there was a bleed over on the edges, if the color blobbed over those edges, and look at the overall color contrast... Then tilt the lens a little off axis and look again to see if the image degrades...

This quik test help me scan a # of lenses quickly, and gave me ideas of which lenses should be mounted for further film testing... (One old projection Petzval seem to have a unusual "signature" and ended up with machined mounts, and beautiful special effects!!!)

It takes a little practice to learn what to look for, but a useful first test...

Steve K

[Tin Can]

Thanks everybody, all is helpful.

I am changing camera, lenses, and film to FP4+ or HP5+ and shooting a few tests today, process tonight, scan and light table tomorrow.

Right now I need a working set for Sunday event, 1890 Christmas more or less...full Sun

I will get the Premo SR (https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00720/00720.pdf) working later, it is such a nice box, very lightweight, yet strong and totally closes up securing lens, bellows and GG from damage.

A camera design that should make a comeback...

[aphcl84]

My testing method is pretty simple, I machined an adapter for my digital camera to fit into one of the copal 3 lens boards for my monorail. I mount the lens board to the rear standard, attach the camera and focus using the lcd, and then use shift+rise to check corners. It only works well with 135mm or longer lenses though, a mirrorless camera would allow the testing of shorter lenses.

[Greg]

My testing method is pretty simple, I machined an adapter for my digital camera to fit into one of the copal 3 lens boards for my monorail. I mount the lens board to the rear standard, attach the camera and focus using the lcd, and then use shift+rise to check corners. It only works well with 135mm or longer lenses though, a mirrorless camera would allow the testing of shorter lenses.

Had done the same recently with my Nikon Z6 on my Sinar 4x5. Problem I encountered was that I couldn't shift the lens to one side and the back to the other side enough to determine the maximum coverage of the lens. Though it worked great for judging the center sharpness of the lens. Viewed the image in live time on my MacBook, was amazed to see how diffraction all of a sudden just kicked in as I stopped down the lens.

[Tin Can]

Greg, your diffraction comment may lead me to try the DSLR trick

There are adapters...

More news, shot another camera and lens which looked sharp to me on GG, but very poor on light table and scans. No need to post the failures

I am getting worried my eyes are deceiving me

Today I will try a Nikon lens

[Jim Noel]

I test lenses not only for sharpness,but how they render round objects such as a tree, or a part thereof.
I set up a scene large enough to not require a bellows length adjustment which includes large foliage, a tree branch or weed resembling one, and a variety of objects of various shapes, sizes and colors.
I photograph these in daylight, some in sun, other parts in shade using 8x10 single sided x-ray film.
I know this seems like a lot of work,but it also gives me an abundance of information.

[Alan9940]

Like others have already commented, I've always followed Fred Picker's advice in that if the lens can render bare tree branches against clear sky, it's sharp enough. I'd be willing to bet that any modern lens we all use is sharper than most of the optics that Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, et al used.

[Tin Can]

Thanks Jim and Alan,

Yesterday I shot my backyard at 50 ft to shed and 200 ft at power lines with trees between that. Full sun to heavy shade. 5X7 B&L Tessar in Volute focused and shot at f11. Really out of focus neg, never used that lens before.

Just loaded 4x5 and 2X3 holders with FP4 and will shoot more modern lenses. Soon...

[Oslolens]

I test side-by-side lenses of same focal length. This way, my 300mm Apo-Ronar MC got a rest while waiting for a new back cell, while the single coated Copy-Claron with some scratches would come with me in my 5x7" bag. To do the test, I used a Sony 5100 with Nikon adapter, Pentax 67 adapter and a Copal #0 adapter + Pentax 67 focus adapter. Identical photos of a tree showed the Copy-Claron was good and sharp, while the Apo-Ronar was bad and unsharp.

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

[Bernice Loui]

Some examples of how film_color balance_color correction filter_color densitometry and ... was done back in the day circa 1996.
Took some digging to find these OLD color transparencies, then scan them.

Camera:
8x10 Sinar P with Sinar Shutter.

Film:
Agfa Chrome RS100. film used MUST be from the same lot number & box preferred.

Lighting:
Bronocolor light box, Elinchrome lamp head with 404 power pack.

Subject:
Macbeth color chart, white board, some newspaper clippings pasted on. Subject to camera-lens distance similar to to be photographed subject on product table.

Exposure:
MUST be within and less than 1/3 f-stop or the 18% gray density and color rendition of the film/lens/lighting/subject/processing will have more errors. Calibrate your light meter as needed (Minolta Flash 4, from that time).

E6 processing was at The New Lab in San Francisco. They held their E6 line tight and consistent day to day.. majority of the time. Common practice was to expose several sheets of color transparency film identical. Have TNL process one sheet, hold the rest. Once the processed sheet was done. examine the color transparency the very best loupe available (Schneider 4x, later Schneider 6x Aspheric_fave to this day). Push-pull as needed. If you got it all good, it would be process normal. If wrong, you got a problem to serious problem if push-pull was more than 2/3 stop.


Two lenses tested were 14" Goerz Red Dot Artar in Ilex shutter set to T (Sinar shutter... using strobe, shutter speed is far less a factor) and 14" Goerz LD Artar in barrel. Taking aperture is f16, which is what Goerz optimized these lenses for as noted in their sales brochure.

Resolution was narry-A-factors as they were BOTH more than good enough regarding resolution. Contrast was nearly identical (favored over the Rodenstock Sironar used at that time).

Note the difference in CC filter correction between the Red Dot Artar and LD Artar.. difference comes up on the color densitometer, as noted on the New Lab gray card test notes... Now, can anyone via the web measure-tell the difference using the 18% gray square on the Macbeth color chart?


14" Red Dot Artar @ f16.
Density numbers:
Red: 84
Green: 88
Blue: 89
Suggested CC filter: 025 green.

198262


14" LD Artar @ f16.
Density numbers:
Red: 84
Green: 94
Blue: 90
Suggested CC filters: 025 green & 025 cyan.

198263

This was only the beginning of how any lens to be used was considered for ownership. Once this was done, the lens to be considered for ownership was used LOTS in a variety of image making conditions for about a month or more to learn the personality of the lens. If it was acceptable, lens found a good home.

~Could lens testing like this be done today?~
*No such thing as "easy" lens test.*


Bernice

[Tin Can]

Thank you for the lesson Bernice!

1958 to1997 I shot Pentax H1a either Kodachrome or Ektachrome, using Sunny 16 from notes inside the film box. No meter, no flash. Mail order processing. Only shot outside in Daylight. Handheld.

What still amazes me is those slides almost always looked well exposed and good enough for a slideshow. I scanned 1000 of them in 1999. Nikon Scanner some iteration, long ago tossed as garbage. Kept the slides.

1998 took a college class in 35mm film photography. New Nikon F70 film camera. Started with a can pinhole. At that moment i also bought a Nikon Coolpix 100 https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/coolpix/others/100/ their first consumer camera. 1.3 mp. I then did every photo class assignment twice with film and digital, printing film on FB and digital on early Epson. The instructor asked me if I thought Digital was going to be popular. Obviously, I replied. Quit film for 13 years until 2011 and joining here. DSLR at events for free. Some fashion portraits hanging on my walls.

Never a Pro in photography. But did get well paid to use a Nikon Stereoscope to take pictures of spring steel cracks mounted in microsections. Auto engine head gaskets. Eyestrain...

LF is my insane hobby to keep me interested in living. I shoot only B&W with used cameras and old lenses. Some shutters work. There are strobe workarounds in studio. Turn the room lights off...

When I joined here in 2011 I never knew what LF was and I was very sick, in a wheelchair. Much better now and walk well. I say LF saved my life. At first I was using a huge 8X10 Linhof Color Kardan on OE tripod to help me get up and switch from sleeping chair to the wheelchair. Basically hugging it. Haven't needed the wheelchair in years now.

I love to 'fix' things, fiddle with old stuff. As a kid it was old tube radios. Wire recorders. 78 RPM Lacquer records to record on. Shortwave. Made a pirate AM radio station age 15. Then shut it right down. FCC

I bought old LF gear as from 2011 to 2013, it was almost free. I would drive my van up to 500 miles one way for gear and never get out of the van because I could not...seller loaded always.

Up until recently I was getting better at using LF cameras, but cataract lens replacement and glaucoma are my reality.

Focusing anything may be past. I was going to try and shoot LF tomorrow at an 1890 Christmas. Changed plans...

I will use my autofocus D750 with 135mm DC lens and a flash. Works almost all the time. Paparazzi

I will be back to LF Monday, i have not quit. In too deep. I have a nice DR with Gas Burst working well. Living room is a portrait studio with 4 studio strobes and backdrops.

I did shoot a portrait with a 5X7 3 weeks ago that satisfied the subject and husband. Must of, he gave me another LF camera!

My goal is one day at a time, come what may.

Thanks for reading.

[Andrew Tymon]

Do you think the softness could be the scans? When I look at the scans I see an overall softness, not a missed focus type. The sharpest part is the handle on the bit that stabilizes the cannon. Maybe you could scan at a higher resolution. Your dev time seemed a little long for Rodinal my time for Fp4+ @ 1+50, 68F, rotary processed is about 8 mins. Rodinal tends to give mushy grain of you over cook it. Don't give up.

[Tin Can]

Great advice. I may have overcooked development AND fix...

Reconsidering it all and will adjust times.

Thank you!

however still shooting D750 later today, I need usable images!

and then I seek the rare snow here, to make postcards with B&W LF for our Historical Village


Do you think the softness could be the scans? When I look at the scans I see an overall softness, not a missed focus type. The sharpest part is the handle on the bit that stabilizes the cannon. Maybe you could scan at a higher resolution. Your dev time seemed a little long for Rodinal my time for Fp4+ @ 1+50, 68F, rotary processed is about 8 mins. Rodinal tends to give mushy grain of you over cook it. Don't give up.