HiI posted a question about possible lens flare some time ago. The problem seemed to be solved: there was a problem with the lens board / front standard giving a light leak. I didn't shoot much film with the suspect objective then, apart from the light leak tests, which came out ok. No image was formed with the camera facing the sun for many minutes with both objectives in place. Now that I've had the chance to try making more pictures, it seems like it was a lens problem from the start after all. Or that at least the lens board light leak wasn't so significant in the first place.Here's the url to the images, if you wouldn't mind viewing them. They're in a single table, so about 400kb to load.http://www.anttiaalto.com/lensproblem/index.html
The left three are the earlier images with the lens board light leak still there. The middle three are with the light leak, but using another objective, as to say, maybe the leak effect was just that little extra at the corners. The three on the right all have the light leak fixed, or that I assume. I can't expose a test sheet every time, but the seal's still firmly in place. Of the three on the right, the topmost is taken with a 90mm objective which I think is working. The sun was somewhat close to the top right corner, so that would explain the intensity there. The two lower images are from this morning, taken with the suspect tele objective. Both were taken facing the sun, but the lens was in good shade. They seem to share the same pattern with the left three negatives.Now, my ideas really sum up to the lens being somehow faulty. Then again there is the possibility of patterns due to bad hanger development, but in the set of eleven negatives developed today there are those without the vertical mark going across the top. Neither of the 90mm objective negs has it. I've also had considerable difficulty printing negatives exposed with the tele objective under a favourable low side light, where all four corners, and maybe the top seem to have received illogical extra light not so obviously visible on the negative, the top left corner being the most difficult to print.I'd like to hear opinions on what may cause this. How big a part my own actions with the camera might play here? If I've got a narrowed down subject, as tends to be the case with a 270mm objective, should it be perfectly likely that I can make a negative that'll need no corrections in print for uneven density on the neg? I mean, if I have the sun in my back, are the corrections I'll make supposed to be solely based on aesthetical preferences? It's been quite a load of work getting into LF. I can't afford a high end objective that I'd think is guaranteed not to have this kind of problems, but should it still be quite possible to have a decent and dependable objective where I can actually see the light fall off errors I'm about to make on the ground glass and also judge by how it looks, if my shade is going to do it's job? I know these may sound just silly questions, but in the photographic equipment market I've got to know, it's never been about the print and usability. Who knows how much you're to pay to make a decent negative.Many thanks in advance!
Bookmarks