Hi, Kent. Yes, I looked at the negative with a loupe. The out-of-focus areas are not from the scanner.
Hi, Kent. Yes, I looked at the negative with a loupe. The out-of-focus areas are not from the scanner.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
To me, it looks like a field curvature issue in the lens, though that would be unlikely on anything but a Petzval or Landscape Lens. Since the house is right across the street and you know the particulars of the camera set-up, I'd try recreating the shot with everything as it was, with special attention to how the issues look on the ground glass.
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
Mark, that's what I'm leaning towards. The lens is a Veritar.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Hi Peter,
This reminds me of an issue I had with a Super Symmar when the cells became unglued / misaligned. I think the lens will need to be looked at myself.
If I can see correctly, you have some stairs in focus but the out-of-focus areas are radially out from there. The bricks to the left and right should also be in focus as they are a very similar distance away from the camera but they aren't in focus.
Rgds,
I think that's the issue. I'm not sure about the Veritar, but portrait lenses often weren't corrected for a flat field. Faster early designs (prior to Jena glasses being used) suffered more from astigmatism, which could be corrected at the cost of curving the focal plane. Also, spherical aberration causes significant focus shift, (did you focus at the taking aperture?) And stopping down a Veritar (or similar lenses) has a different effect on depth of field than with more conventional lenses. As Wollensak said: https://alphaxbetax.files.wordpress....ritar-lens.pdfOriginally Posted by Peter De Smidt
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
I remember that I had a Vitax lens many years ago that produced similar images. I agree with Mark that the lens probably has a curved, not flat field.
I did focus stopped down, and I expected that the portrait lenses were optimized for closer subjects. I was hoping it would also work well for other things, but it doesn't look like it. I'll put it on my Sinar and take a more careful shot sometime soon. I was expecting the "behind the focus point depth of field", but that's what seems missing. The sides of the house are just behind the focus point, whereas nearer elements seem in better focus.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
When you reshoot, find a nice big brick or cinderblock wall and square the film plane up to it perfectly. That should tell you something.
Kent in SD
In contento ed allegria
Notte e di vogliam passar!
Will do, Kent.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
After a couple of Martinis, it occurs to me that for all its improved color corrections and AR coatings, the Veritar is still a Verito, a Landscape Lens with a front modifier. Yup, curved field...
I'm always right, and I never lie...
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks