Canon P - Photo Scans Keep Coming Back Blurry/Out-of-focus

[Grephenson]

I've recently purchased TWO Canon P Rangefinders, shot multiple test rolls at multiple shutter speeds/apertures, and my scans have come back blurry/out-of-focus for both cameras. I've tested with 2 different lenses as well: Canon 50mm f/1.4 and Canon 50mm f/1.8. Additionally, I've also tested to make sure the rangefinders are calibrated by focusing to infinity and ensuring far away objects are in-focus. Any thoughts on what could be the problem here? Could it be the lenses? I use a local shop for developing and scanning and have always had great results with them so I know it's not the scanning. Included some examples photos below.

TL;DR - Tested 2 Canon P bodies, tested 2 Canon 50mm lenses, photo scans come back blurry/out-of-focus.

1/60 | f/1.4 -
1/125 | f/5.6 -
1/250 | f/4 -

 

[Wallendo]

Did you test infinity focus using an open back and a semi-opaque piece of film? If so, the negatives should have looked fine. Canon rangefinders and ltm lenses were built to much higher standards that the soviet cameras and usually don't have issues with focus.

Unfortunately, I cannot view your images (apparently blocked at work) so I can't help with those.

 

[btaylor]

You need to shoot some real focus tests and do the check Wallendo pointed out above. Do it all at wide open aperture. I shoot resolution charts, with a rod marked at 1” intervals at an angle so I can read them next to the chart and see where the actual plane of focus is. 9 feet or 3 meters is a good distance. Then check infinity with a groundglass or similar pressed up against the film rails and eyeball it with a loupe or magnifying glass. Keep the camera on a tripod. Something is certainly amiss.

 

[Grephenson]

Did you test infinity focus using an open back and a semi-opaque piece of film? If so, the negatives should have looked fine. Canon rangefinders and ltm lenses were built to much higher standards that the soviet cameras and usually don't have issues with focus.

No, I just tested it actually in the viewfinder. Thank you for your reply!

You need to shoot some real focus tests and do the check Wallendo pointed out above. Do it all at wide open aperture. I shoot resolution charts, with a rod marked at 1” intervals at an angle so I can read them next to the chart and see where the actual plane of focus is. 9 feet or 3 meters is a good distance. Then check infinity with a groundglass or similar pressed up against the film rails and eyeball it with a loupe or magnifying glass. Keep the camera on a tripod. Something is certainly amiss.

Oh ok, I like how this sounds - very systematic. What exactly is this groundglass process? Thank you for your reply!

 

[btaylor]

The groundglass process is equivalent to Wallendo’s semi opaque piece of film- something on the film plane you can see through and focus an image on. Groundglass works great because it doesn’t bend, but even semi transparent scotch tape will do in a pinch stretched across the film gate.

 

[gone]

The tape will work, and you can use a camera lens as a loupe. It's tricky not pressing the tape inward when viewing the image and throwing your focus off, but w/ patience it can be done.

 

[mgb74]

If you have a piece of glass that will fit, it's very easy to make that into a ground glass. Google around for instructions.

 

[Huss]

Just do a simple test focusing on something in the near distance (not infinity), where there are numerous objects in front and behind. And see where you actual point of focus is.
Even look at the images you have taken - try to determine what is in focus, and where you actually focused.

If nothing is in focus - it is the scanning.

 

[Huss]

p.s that corgi is adorable.

 

[Paul Howell]

Berry Thorton in his book Edge of Darkness describes how to conduct a focus test.

 

[mtnbkr]

When I had a similar problem with my VT, I set up a target 3 dimensional object, then measured from the film plane marking on my camera to a specific point on the object. I adjusted the lens to that distance, then checked focus via the back of the camera using a homemade "ground glass" consisting of a glass slide with frosted scotch tape over it. I pinned that into place over the open shutter with a 10x loupe and made sure my image on the ground glass was in focus. Confident my lens was correct, I then adjusted horizontal alignment on the camera until the split images coincided in the viewfinder. After all that, I took the camera outside and focused on an object at infinity and verified infinity focus was correct.

It's a bit tedious because the rangefinder adjustment movements are tiny and any pressure against the screw affects that adjustment, but with a light touch and minor tweaks, you can get it dialed in.

Chris

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Odds are it's the scanning.

Two cameras and two lenses would not show the same focusing problem.

If the RF was off then parts of the pictures that are closer or farther away would be in focus though the subject is out of focus. Additionally the RF wouldn't line up at infinity if it were out of what (except for rather odd 'out of whacks').

If you have an enlarger try making a print - it will look awful but it will show if the negative is sharp.

As as to the store - as they say in the financial ads: "Past performance is not a guarantee of future yields." Take the scans and negatives back to the store and see what they say.

 

[reddesert]

I can't really tell from the pictures posted, but it matters whether the issue is "my photos are blurry everywhere," or "my photos are sharply focused on some point that is forward or back of the point I was focusing on." These point to different types of focusing or scanning errors. (Also, you should make sure the lenses are clear, though haze is more likely to cause loss of contrast than blur.)

You can test this by taking a picture of a fence or yardstick running obliquely across the frame from near to far, focus on some landmark like a fence post or the center of the yardstick, and examine the negatives to see where the sharpest focus lies. Also, it will help to look at the actual negatives with a magnifier, in addition to or instead of the scans.

 

[Grephenson]

The tape will work, and you can use a camera lens as a loupe. It's tricky not pressing the tape inward when viewing the image and throwing your focus off, but w/ patience it can be done.

Did the tape thing today and really the focus seems fine. There was no glaring "oh yeah that's out of focus" moment.

Just do a simple test focusing on something in the near distance (not infinity), where there are numerous objects in front and behind. And see where you actual point of focus is.
Even look at the images you have taken - try to determine what is in focus, and where you actually focused.

If nothing is in focus - it is the scanning.

That's the problem. I feel like NOTHING is in focus. I decided to whip out my old V600 and scan some of the negatives (the blurry photos that started all of this were from a local shop). No increase in sharpness doing my own scans. Also thank you - the pups name is Debra.

I can't really tell from the pictures posted, but it matters whether the issue is "my photos are blurry everywhere," or "my photos are sharply focused on some point that is forward or back of the point I was focusing on." These point to different types of focusing or scanning errors. (Also, you should make sure the lenses are clear, though haze is more likely to cause loss of contrast than blur.)

You can test this by taking a picture of a fence or yardstick running obliquely across the frame from near to far, focus on some landmark like a fence post or the center of the yardstick, and examine the negatives to see where the sharpest focus lies. Also, it will help to look at the actual negatives with a magnifier, in addition to or instead of the scans.

I'll be sure to try this too!


Here's a good example photo. Shot at f/5.6 1/125:

 

[Grephenson]

f/5.6 1/250

 

[bdial]

Have you tried looking at the negatives with a magnifier? That should help you determine if it’s the scanning or not.

 

[mgb74]

It's unlikely that the lab's scanner is malfunctioning, but it's possible. It's unlikely that both cameras and/or both lenses are off, but it's possible. It's unlikely that you're introducing camera shake (looks like bright lighting so I assume a fast shutter) but it's possible.

I'm not a fan of the tape approach for checking focus with 35mm as the image is so small. If you weren't using a strong, high quality loupe, I don't think you could tell. And if you weren't keeping the tape perfectly flat while checking, you won't get reliable results.

Is there a possibility you've mounted the lenses incorrectly?

I would take 3 cameras (your 2 plus a 3rd that's "known good". Run one single roll through the 3 of them. Take at least 5 exposures with each camera (infinity, 25 ft focused, 25 ft measured, 10 ft focused, 10 feet measured). Use a good tripod, fast shutter, and wide aperture. Use an inanimate object as your subject. If all 3 sets are "off", it's most likely the scanning.

 

[250swb]

Discounting the first photo at f/1.4 which is never going to be critically sharp anyway it looks to me like there is something sharp in each photo, which rules out faults in the lens. So unless the rangefinder is out of adjustment I think it may possibly be a case of unreasonable expectations. Focusing close, think dog/chair, the DOF is still critical at f/5.6 and it doesn't take much, leaning forward here, leaning back there, for perfect focus to be shifted to out-of-focus by the photographers body swaying, which of course won't be noticed in the viewfinder because it's a rangefinder camera and not an SLR. Also with a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera you don't get nearly as much DOF as you would with a compact digital camera for the same angle of view, for example. This can be a shock if the photographer is new to 35mm film photography.

The second thing when general questions of film image softness comes into play is the level of sharpening needed with film compared with digital. If the scans have come back from the lab unsharpened, which would be good, it's highly likely that you'd need to input much more sharpening than you would with digital files, and before somebody says it, no I don't mean over sharpen them.

 

[Don_ih]

Set the lens to infinity and check the rangefinder for accuracy by looking at something in the distance (I check rangefinders by looking at a light post at the end of my street). If the double-image is off, adjust the rangefinder.
The screw next to the viewfinder on the front of the camera hides the rangefinder adjustment.
All of your photos look like they are focused perhaps a bit too close (which could be the result of moving after focusing). Otherwise, though, they seem about as sharp as they should be for the apertures selected.

 

[outwest]

Tripod?

 

[Huss]

f/5.6 1/250

That metal chair in mid distance seems to be in focus. I checked by using the magnifier option on your image.

 

[Huss]

Did the tape thing today and really the focus seems fine. There was no glaring "oh yeah that's out of focus" moment.


That's the problem. I feel like NOTHING is in focus. I decided to whip out my old V600 and scan some of the negatives (the blurry photos that started all of this were from a local shop). No increase in sharpness doing my own scans. Also thank you - the pups name is Debra.


I'll be sure to try this too!


Here's a good example photo. Shot at f/5.6 1/125:

The rear right leg of the chair at the base seems to be in focus.

 

[Huss]

If you want you can mail me one of your negatives and I can scan it with my Z7 set up. Your V600 is not going to yield great scans, and perhaps your lab has become sloppy.

 

[Don_ih]

Scanned with a V600. I think it does fine.

 

[Huss]

View attachment 306756
Scanned with a V600. I think it does fine.

If you're happy with it. I clicked on it to enlarge, and there isn't enough detail for me to make a large print from it.

p.s. love the image.