Am I missing focus?

[Kirks518]

I recently got a cool old Ikoflex 'coffee can', and I'm trying to figure out if it's me or the camera/lens. I can't seem to get a sharp image, so I'm hoping you guys can help me figure out where the problem is. Lens is the Zeiss Novar 8cm.

I had my reading glasses on for this shot, and I focused on her face as best I could. Full image and a 100% crop from a 10"x10" scan:



Thanks for the help!

 

[Fixcinater]

The grass in front of her feet looks sharper and more contrasty than the grass right near her feet, with the sharpest part being nearest the edge of the frame.

Was this wide open? Does the camera show any signs of ever being opened up? Little marks on edges of retaining rings or anything of that sort?

 

[shutterfinger]

The "trick" to focusing with reading glasses is to keep the ground glass/focusing screen approximately 12 inches away from your eyes.
If the view hood has a magnifier built into it use it.

I agree with post #2, the grass just in front of the subject is the sharpest point of focus.

Test the focusing system by making a temporary ground glass to fit the film plane as the film will be when correctly loaded. The gg can be glass or plastic with transparent tape on one side, strips adjacent but not overlapping, tape goes toward the lens. With the camera on a tripod loupe focus either the view screen or the temporary gg on a fine detail subject such as news print or a map pinned flat to a wall 6 to 10 feet away. Check the focus of the other with the loupe, it should match the initial focused screen. A mismatch is corrected by changing the position of the view hood screen. Taking lens has to be focused forward of the focus point of the view lens- raise the focus screen by putting shims between it and its mount; taking lens focuses reward of the view lens- lower the focus screen bu removing shims from the between the screen and its mount.
Inspect the camera carefully for proper lens mounting of both the view and taking lens. A shim may have been left out of the view lens to body mount during cleaning.

 

[Europan]

I think that’s about what you can expect as technical sharpness from such a lens and camera. Your focus setting may be improved upon, I agree. Congratulations on the funny camera, I’ve never heard “coffee can”. I only know the “lunch bag” DeVry, the “bum bag” Admira, and the “handbag” Movilux. Oh, and the “Easter egg” Paillard-Bolex 18-5.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Use a roll for testing sharpness may be againts to lots of kithen objects , bottles etc. And use a tripod. You will find the problem sooner or later. Zeiss lenses render the skin tones very elegantly and smooth. Like an greek relief , very very smoothly. If you find the sweet spot ,
its too great to view the results. I have a picture at gallery with novar and I found it low contrast and resist to photoshop. These lenses are optimized for printing as they take the images , not like any other lens , as I said use a roll for experiments . Grass is near to sharp and face not bad and this is good news.

ps. I looked to image again and some repair damage may be ?

 

[Peltigera]

I have a problem focussing my Ikoflex which is entirely me. I tend to have my right hand over the edge of the lens plate while trying to focus - this stops the lens plate from moving as it should and so I get poor focus. If I remember to hold the camera sensibly it focusses just fine. Not saying you are as daft as I am but check how you hold the camera.

 

[Ian Grant]

I've seen issues with Novars they seem very prone to go soft with age. Zeiss (Schott) introduced some new optical glasses in the early 1930's which was used in some re-designed Tessars. Novars, Leitz Summars etc. The glass is softer and scratches easily (more prone to cleaning marks), and is also affected by pollutants.

The Novar on my Ikonta 531 is unusable despite looking very clean but when compared to a later post WWII Novar it's quite obviously low contrast, I;ve seen the same with Tessars.

Ian

 

[gone]

I guess I've just been lucky, but every Novar I've owned has been very, very good. These are triplets (which I prefer to a 4 element any old time for their center sharpness), so they need to be stopped down to f8 or f11. If you're shooting yours wide open, that's maybe an issue. Focus is easy as pie to ck on these. Put the camera on a tripod (can't remember if these have the tripod mount on the back, but if so, just lay it down w/ a rag and a rubber band on the tripod to keep it up there) put an old focus screen/ground glass/tightly stretched Scotch Magic tape across the film rails, focus at something at least 150' away w/ the lens open on B or T, and see if the image is sharp at infinity both on the back (w/ a loupe or SLR lens used as one) and up on top. If it isn't, shim the top (very easy to remove) until it is. Or, when you remove the top hood, look to see if there's a lock nut on the viewing lens, If so, loosen it and get things collimanated there. Unless yours has been dropped or someone fooled w/ it before you, it's unusual to have collimation issues.

These cameras don't have the brightest of focus screens, so you may want to replace yours, if that's an issue. These are really neat TLRs, and it'is nice to see someone shooting something different. They are a tad heavy though. Me, I go w/ Bakelite TLRs for the weight savings.

As Fixinator pointed out, the shot you have posted here is front focused. Easy to ck to see if it's your technique or the camera by going through the steps above.

 

[snapguy]

java

Asking for advice about a camera called a "coffee can" leaves a lot of us folks out of the picture because we don't have a clue about what camera you are talking about. I might well have one in my collection but don't know it and hence not be able to share my knowledge with you. If I have any. I wouldn't ask you about my Yaki-Maki.

 

[Fixcinater]

Asking for advice about a camera called a "coffee can" leaves a lot of us folks out of the picture because we don't have a clue about what camera you are talking about. I might well have one in my collection but don't know it and hence not be able to share my knowledge with you. If I have any. I wouldn't ask you about my Yaki-Maki.

http://www.tlr-cameras.com/German/Ikoflex.html

Pretty common nomenclature.

 

[Kirks518]

http://www.collection-appareils.fr/zeiss/images/Ikoflex_I_850_16.jpg

That's the one I have. Really cool looking, and mine is in as good a shape or better. It's the second variant of the first Ikon TLR (c. 1934-35).

I shot some more with it today, paying careful attention to my focusing. I have a feeling that the issue is me. I'm noticing that through my eyes, I'm seeing a wide range in what looks like it's in focus, but then I would check again, and find that what I thought looked in focus wasn't perfectly in focus. Not sure if that makes sense.

I'm getting back 2 rolls tomorrow that I dropped off today, and I'll see how those went, and further assess as needed.

As for the above photo, it wasn't wide open, but was either f/8 or f/11. The aperture doesn't have stop clicks, so once I take the reading on my (old Sunset Unittic) meter, I kind of range it based on where I think I need to be.

I'm really hoping this works out, as I love the novelty of using an 80 year old camera.

 

[Fixcinater]

Neat rig, hope this next set of images shows it to be a good rig. TLR focus is tough for me, tougher than my Pentax 6x7 even using the waist level finder on the Pentax. The lenses aren't *that* much brighter on the Pentax, but maybe the ground glass is.

 

[DcAnalogue]

Apart from focusing issues while shooting.... anybody thought about scanning....? Isn't that easy getting good and sharp images from cheap flatbed scanners.....

 

[Kirks518]

^ Possibly, but these were scanned on an Imacon Flextight, which I wouldn't call cheap. My local mom & pop photo lab did the scans, and that's what they use.

As a sidenote, I had two more rolls developed and scanned, and I think it's a combination of my eyes and the taking lens. The taking lens isn't perfect, and has some haze and some other anomalies I noticed. On top of that, on the last 2 rolls, I paid very close attention to how I was focusing, and my eyes show a (relatively) wide range of what appears to be 'in focus'. So it's a mix of the two I've decided. I'm going to really slow down, and try and hit it perfectly. I'm also thinking about taking the lens apart and trying to clean the internal glass. I hope that would also help with the lack of contrast in the overall images.

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd look for another lens, they do appear second hand. I do have 3 spare Novar lenses but one's in Turkey - it's post WWII & coated - and will be fitted to my Ikonta, I have a 2nd Novar for a Super Ikonta but despite looking mint is hazy and the 105mm Novar I bought for its shutter is lowish contrast. I think you need 80 mm (8 cm).

These lenses can be found quite cheap, I'm talking £5-£10 ($8-$16), you might also look for a Tessar the cells fit the smae shutter (as long as it's rimset).

Ian

 

[JW PHOTO]

Many years ago I had the later Ikoflex 1C with a Novar lens. It was a very well built camera, easy to operate and even had a built in meter. I shot probably 10 rolls through it and gave it to a collector friend who still has it. I was not impressed with that minty, coated Novar lens at all. I have a family portrait that I shot at between f8 and f11 and the outer egdes of the 11x14 are soft. Not just the corners, but about 2 1/2" to 3" into each side. For many years I've frowned on the Novar lens, but heard others speak highly of it. I now think mine must have either been cleaned and reassembled wrong or maybe the focus was off also. The more you stopped that lens down the better the center got, but the edges and corners never did catch up. Later I stumbled onto a couple of folding Netter cameras with the three element Netter lens and have nothing but good things to say about them. I believe the old Nettar lenses were basically the same as the Novar, but I could be wrong. I'd check the focus on something like a picket fence or something similar. John W

 

[elekm]

The Nettar is a triplet (three lens elements) - same as the Novar. Curiously, the Nettar and Novar co-existed in the lineup, but after the end of World War II, only the Novar survived. Or at least, I don't recall ever seeing the Nettar on a post-war camera, although some might exist.

I'm not sure which company manufactured the Nettar, but production of the Novar was handled by several companies, which could explain the variations in image quality.

I believe Nettars have serial numbers, as do some pre-war Novars. But I don't believe postwar Novars carry a serial number.

I shot with a Novar on a folding Contina II and got soft corners to about f/5.6. It was my first Zeiss Ikon camera (later Continas, the Ikonette and others).

When I was buying cameras heavily, I simply avoided Novar-equipped cameras and searced for those with a Tessar, except for those cameras that only came with a Novar.

I shot with the first Ikoflex I (Novar) and thought the photos were reasonably sharp despite the cleaning marks.

Have you checked infinity focus on the Ikoflex I? You do that by removing that small circular plate on the back of the camera. The put some frosted tape around the film insert. Then use an SLR with a telephoto lens to check infinity focus.

I need to update my page to show my current method, but here's the cruder version.

 

[pentaxpete]

can I join in ? -- When I was in Germany in the British Army in Iserlohn, 1957-58, I bought a New Ikoflex for the equivalent of £ 15-00 Sterling -- it had a 75mm Zeiss 'Opton-Tessar' lens. For a few years it seemed OK but then all my photos seemed out of focus and I found out that the 'Opton-Tessar' version was set in pitch and when camera got hot in the summer the pitch softened and the lens sunk in so that may be the reason. I sold it to an 'Unsuspecting' Camera Club member ---

 

[Kirks518]

elekm - Thanks for the info about that circular panel in the back. I've only had the camera for about a month, but had no idea what that was for.

So I went ahead and did the scotch tape trick. I'm going to see if I can get my daughter to model for me today, and then we'll see how it went. I actually used my DSLR with my 100mm macro to look at the image on the tape, as it was really difficult for me to really see what was going on back there. Live view an 10x with the macro helped. I have my fingers crossed, and will let you all know when I get the results.