PDA

View Full Version : 110 XL Soft Focussing



JPlomley
28-Apr-2008, 09:05
I had a chance to try out a 2005 manufactured 110XL recently and had considerable difficulty getting a sharp focus point on the GG of my Arca. I had no problems whatsoever with my 135 Sironar-S or 90/4.5 Grandagon-N against which I was testing this optic, on the identical subject. The focus play on the 110 was about 0.2 - 0.5 mm of spread, whereas with the Rodies, the focus point just "popped" with virtually no play. The resolution of the Rodies on the GG was also significantly better than the 110XL. Could there simply be an issue with this particular sample? Or is this typical of the Symmar design?

Kevin Crisp
28-Apr-2008, 09:24
I know that back when I could focus with just reading glasses (no loupe) the one lens I would make mistakes with was the 110. With a loupe I could easily see when it was in focus when wide open. You are comparing it to a longer lens (135) that would have a more shallow depth of field, and a bigger image at the same distance, and that might explain why it seems to pop in and out of focus for you more easily. You are also comparing it to a 90mm, which is a shorter lens but is also faster, which would give back some depth of field and give you a brighter image on the ground glass. Mine is plenty sharp for focusing wide open, unless there is some other explanation for this maybe you have a sample specific problem.

Bruce Watson
28-Apr-2008, 09:51
The focus play on the 110 was about 0.2 - 0.5 mm of spread, whereas with the Rodies, the focus point just "popped" with virtually no play. The resolution of the Rodies on the GG was also significantly better than the 110XL. Could there simply be an issue with this particular sample? Or is this typical of the Symmar design?

My sample of the 110mm SS-XL doesn't do that. Very easy to focus wide open. It has a definite "correct" focus point -- not a spread like you are finding.

Some of the 80mm SS-XL lenses were soft wide open. I don't remember the cause, but I'm thinking it was an element spacing problem. But my 80mm SS-XL doesn't have that problem either.

So I'm thinking it's a problem with your particular sample. It's very unlikely that it's a problem with the Super Symmar design; the Super Symmars have earned sterling reputations.

JPlomley
28-Apr-2008, 12:04
Cheers folks. Sounds like I would be better off getting another sample.

Ron Marshall
28-Apr-2008, 12:34
The sample I had was easy to focus and one of the sharpest lenses I owned.

Dave_B
28-Apr-2008, 16:13
The sample I had was easy to focus and one of the sharpest lenses I owned.

ditto

JPlomley
28-Apr-2008, 16:24
It is that measured performance by so many on this forum that has driven me to get a good copy. I ran out of IC in Zion last year too many times with my 135 Sironar-S, so I need the 110XL before I head to Sequioa in three weeks and Midwest is out of stock!

Kevin Crisp
28-Apr-2008, 16:37
If you focus at f:8 is this a problem? Is the finished product sharp?

Rob Champagne
28-Apr-2008, 17:19
It is that measured performance by so many on this forum that has driven me to get a good copy. I ran out of IC in Zion last year too many times with my 135 Sironar-S, so I need the 110XL before I head to Sequioa in three weeks and Midwest is out of stock!

Lens spacing on the 110XL is more crtical than on other symmars since it is not a true symmar. If you are having focus problems with that lens, then I suggest you first have it bench tested as all that may be required is an additional spacer ring. Mine came with two when it was new. If yours has none I suspect that may be the culprit.

Glenn Thoreson
29-Apr-2008, 11:56
Wide angle lenses are more difficult to determine when they are in sharp focus. That's their nature. Folks with very good eyesight may have no trouble focusing them. Folks with questionable eyesight, such as myself, can have various degrees of difficulty with them. That doesn't necessarilly mean the lens is faulty. I have several examples of lenses, some of which are a snap to focus, and some are very hard to focus. They all produce sharp negatives, though.

jetcode
30-Apr-2008, 16:56
I had a chance to try out a 2005 manufactured 110XL recently and had considerable difficulty getting a sharp focus point on the GG of my Arca. I had no problems whatsoever with my 135 Sironar-S or 90/4.5 Grandagon-N against which I was testing this optic, on the identical subject. The focus play on the 110 was about 0.2 - 0.5 mm of spread, whereas with the Rodies, the focus point just "popped" with virtually no play. The resolution of the Rodies on the GG was also significantly better than the 110XL. Could there simply be an issue with this particular sample? Or is this typical of the Symmar design?

what kind of loupe are you using?

Dave Jeffery
2-May-2008, 03:36
If anyone has unscrewed the lens on the 110 XL then the critical focus may be off. The aspherical lenses cannot be tampered with at all.
Unlike most large format lenses the aspherical lenses have a critical lens spacing that must be within one thenth of a milimeter IIRC, and the only place the focus can be reset correctly is the factory in Germany.

Also be carefull with any filters that you mount on the 110XL as there may not be enough clearance at the front of the lens and the center of the front element coating can get marred. A step up ring may be needed depending on the brand of filter. I bought a second hand lens from a dealer in NY and there was a slight scuff in the coating on the lense in the center that had been hidden with a lens coating of some sort. Once I cleaned the lens it showed up.

I sent the lens to Germany, the front element was replaced and the focus was set at the factory to the tune of $394, which didn't include shipping. I was quoted $128 by Fed Ex for shipping but managed to get it for free.

I'm not sure buying those lenses second hand is a good idea because of the critical focus issue, and if you own one never unscrew the lenses.

Somewhere on Schneiders site there is a note about the critical lens spacing on the aspherical lenses.

Good luck!

Dave Jeffery
2-May-2008, 04:00
On this page

http://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogSubCategoryDisplay.aspx?CID=169

click the “View Brochure” button (.pdf)

and read on the first page “Performance requires Effort” to read about the critical lens spacing.

Good Luck!

Chuck Pere
2-May-2008, 04:38
Can you mount the lens on a board without unscrewing the rear elements?

Bruce Watson
2-May-2008, 05:08
Can you mount the lens on a board without unscrewing the rear elements?

One can but for me the telekinesis effort leaves me just completely exhausted. ;)

JPlomley
2-May-2008, 17:17
Hey Folks,

Just checking back in on this thread. Thanks for all the responses.

Joe, I use three different loupes depending on the lens and the climate. I use a Schneider 4x MC as my all around loupe since it has a diopter corrector which I have adjusted to focus on the back of the GG (I taped a sheet of typed text to the side of the GG facing the lens and adjusted the diopter accordingly). I did the same with my Silvestri 6x tilting loupe which I dedicate to focussing WA lenses. Finally, I have a Toyo 3.6x loupe which I use on my yearly trip to the Rockies every winter. This keeps me far enough away from the GG to prevent fogging.

Dave, how literal is Schneider on this point. I mean, you have to unscrew the rear cell in order to mount the lens. Surely they are not suggesting that one sends the lens board along with the lens back to the factory for mounting. I cannot imagine many people are doing this. On the copy of the 110XL that I have tested, the rear cell seats just fine at the end of its travel. I could not see a shim/spacer between the rear cell and the shutter, and there was no way I was taking the front cell apart to check if there was a missing spacer there.

~ Jeff

Dave Jeffery
3-May-2008, 03:49
Hi Jeff,

If you haven't already read over the "Performance requires Effort" section a couple of times you might again. The tolerances are very fine. What temperature will the metal be when you screw the lens back together? Can the condition of the mating surfaces and the way the threads bind allow a slightly different distance to result and / or the surfaces may not be perfectly parallel? How much torque do you need? Do you use the 36" pipe wrench?, and if we use our hands did we just leave the gym or were we decorating cream puffs : )

My $394 repair bill included replacing the front element which has to be the biggest expense so I'm not sure what just setting the focus costs?

A number of people on these forums don't desire sharp lenses and images anyway.

I know how much it costs me to travel to places to shoot, and given those costs plus film and developing costs, not knowing if my lens is precisley set to focus perfectly would not be acceptable to me.

I shot the Las Vegas skyline the other night and with the sharp edges of the buildings and signs in the image I'm glad the lens was set at the factory.

I'm hoping someone with more experiece will chime in. You may want to call Schneider or email them and pose the question, but I chose to send in the lens and never have to question it's integrity.

Good Luck and I'm glad you had a great trip to Zion!

JPlomley
3-May-2008, 05:10
Hi Dave,

As always, a very thoughtful and useful reply. Cheers for your helpful advice and suggestions (concerning Zion as well).

And Zion was a blast (so much so that we are heading back next year for three weeks and branching out to a few of the other NPs). My wife and I took three major LF trips last year, dropping about 2K on film and processing; so I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. We sent our top 20 images out for Imacon preview scans and ripped 18" x 24" prints on Epson Premium Lustre as proofing paper. We then took a trip down to see Ted Harris to have some IQSmart3 scans performed on those images requiring a higher Dmax. We printed the final images on Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl. So yes, it is a lot of work and effort for those precious few images that make it to the final edit, and the lenses clearly play a major role.

For the record, I am very critical of lens performance. All chromes are examined with the Schneider 6x7 loupe on the light table. Anything remotely soft gets binned. All my GG loupes are calibrated to my Arca Swiss F-Field, which I shoot nested in a the 30cm extension bracket (even when using wide angles). This ensures an extremely rigid set-up. My tripod is an old Gitzo 1410 MII with a Z1 ballhead. Again, all in the interest of stability. All filters are MRC, yada yada yada.

But now you have me real concerned about the 110XL. I'm leaving for Yosemite/Sequoia/Kings Canyon May 15th for three weeks, so there is not enough time for a factory calibration. I am sending the current lens I have back to the original owner and am picking up another one from Jim Andracki. It is used but LN. However, based on your feedback, it sounds as if I am better off buying new and just sending my lensboard to Schneider for mounting. You know, I met Jack Dykinga last year in Zion. I asked him a million and one questions, but never thought to ask him about this (since I was shooting all Rodenstock)...I'll touch base with Jeff at Badger. He's in touch with Jack quite often, so I'll see if I can find out what Jack has done.

~ Jeff

Sheldon N
3-May-2008, 08:20
Reading through the Schneider literature, they reference a couple things.

1) Lens was machined to extremely high tolerances and assembled with a carefully controlled element to element spacing. I read that to mean that they made sure that any shim in the front element was exactly the right size.

2) Lens should not be taken apart unecessarily, in order to prevent its being screwed back on crooked.

3) If the shutter is being replaced, that should be sent back to Schneider for calibration.

Nowhere in this does it infer that Schneider needs to be the one to mount the lens to the lensboard. The rear element is machined with a firm end stop point where the threads end. This means that the spacing of the rear element is determined by the machining process and not by how tight you turn the rear element (within reason).

I think the important things to remember are - don't take off the front element, don't cross thread the rear element, and use just a normal amount of hand tightening when putting the rear element back on. Obviously if you lose the front element spacer ring or need to replace the shutter, that should go back to Schneider.

I can't say that I've ever heard of anyone sending an XL lens (47, 58, 72, 90, 110, 150, 210 or otherwise) back to Schneider just to have them put it on a lensboard.

JimL
4-May-2008, 02:05
Unlike most large format lenses the aspherical lenses have a critical lens spacing that must be within one thenth of a milimeter IIRC, and the only place the focus can be reset correctly is the factory in Germany.

0.1mm is 0.004", or about the thickness of a piece of 24lb. bond paper. In the machining world it wouldn't be considered a particularly difficult tolerance to hold. Losing one of the shims from the front element could certainly cause the lens to be out of tolerance, but you would have to do something pretty disastrous to the lens (i.e. cross threading) to fall outside this tolerance by hand tightening the rear element. If the tolerance was 0.01mm (0.0004") the story might be a little different, and definitely the lenses would have to be individually spaced for each Copal shutter, and also to account for variations in the manufacture of the elements themselves. Looking at the diagram on the sk grimes website (http://www.skgrimes.com/products/cobig/copal.htm), the spacing tolerance for Copal shutters is +/-0.025mm (+/-0.001").

If you're careful, I don't think there's any need to worry about mounting a Symmar XL on a board yourself.

Dave Jeffery
4-May-2008, 03:31
Thanks Sheldon and Jim,

I bought my lens second hand from a dealer in NY and when I found the scuff on the front element which had been covered up I questioned the overall condition of the lens and having read the blurb in the literature I decided just to send it off and make sure it was precise.

It's great to hear that you believe the tolerances should be OK.

Jeff still believes he may have a soft focusing problem with the lens. Any ideas?

My decision was based on my contact with John Soringas at Schneider in CA, who was a pleasure to deal with, and perhaps Jeff you might call or email him. His contact information is on the previous link. It would probably be good to get the latest official recommendation about tolerances etc. from the manufacturer anyway as it's been a while since I contacted them and .1 mm may be incorrect as well?

I'm probably too anal from the years of DIR rebreather diving where two equipment flaws greatly increase the odds of fatality.

Best Regards everyone!

Noah A
9-Dec-2010, 09:04
Now you guys have me worried. I bought a used 110xl from KEH the other day. It arrived today and the front element was somewhat loose in the shutter. I carefully hand tightened it and did not remove it from the shutter.

The lens, which was rated as EX+, looks mostly new other than the lack of lens caps, so I'm happy with it. But how do I know if the lens is spaced and working properly? Of course I'll shoot a few test sheets once I get a lensboard.

If it looks sharp on the groundglass and on film, does that mean it's probably ok? I guess what I'm asking is--if it has a problem how unsharp will it be? Are we talking a subtle difference or will it be way out?

Richard Wasserman
9-Dec-2010, 09:28
I believe this was a problem with some of the very early 110mm lenses. I have had 2 of them, lost the first in a bicycle accident, and still have the second. It is a fabulous lens and one of my all-time favorites. I love the way it renders and its field of view. I think you do need to test yours on some film. As I remember if there is a problem it is pretty obvious. Good luck! I really like your work btw...




Now you guys have me worried. I bought a used 110xl from KEH the other day. It arrived today and the front element was somewhat loose in the shutter. I carefully hand tightened it and did not remove it from the shutter.

The lens, which was rated as EX+, looks mostly new other than the lack of lens caps, so I'm happy with it. But how do I know if the lens is spaced and working properly? Of course I'll shoot a few test sheets once I get a lensboard.

If it looks sharp on the groundglass and on film, does that mean it's probably ok? I guess what I'm asking is--if it has a problem how unsharp will it be? Are we talking a subtle difference or will it be way out?

Noah A
9-Dec-2010, 09:53
... As I remember if there is a problem it is pretty obvious. Good luck! I really like your work btw...

Thanks for the advice and kind words. That's what I wanted to know. I was wondering if it would be pretty easy to spot or if it would be the kind of thing I'd spot only when I make a 40x50in. print in a month (after my return period runs out).

I'll shoot some tests soon and hope for the best.

I can't believe how small the lens is! I was considering a 90mm to complement my 150mm and 210mm lenses, but I really don't like my wide lenses to look wide and the fast 90's are huge. I think this is destined to become a favorite since it seems like just what I was looking for. Something a bit wider than the 150 but without a 'wideangle' feel to the images.

Of course I may still need something wider for special circumstances...we'll see.

Noah A
19-Dec-2010, 20:03
In case anyone else is considering this fine lens...I tested mine with great results.

It was surprisingly sharp wide open, very sharp at f/11 and very very sharp at f/22. I took my test film to my local lab, which does a horrible job but is fast. My first real photos with the lens are going to the good lab and should be back soon.

I thought a 150 was going to by my main 4x5 lens. It still may be, but the 110xl will give it some competition. It's sharp, allows for more movements than my camera can handle and it's a very nice focal length.

Richard Wasserman
19-Dec-2010, 21:22
Noah, I concur with everything you said. The 110 SSXL is one of my favorite lenses for all the same reasons.