Gl690 No sharp images.

Antaras · Monday at 10:19 AM

Hello,

I've got a Gl690 with 100mm f3.5 lens and shot 4 rolls of film so far and most images are not in focus it seems.
Checked the rangefinder patch allignment already and its looks good.
I do have a bit shaky hands sometimes but i shot some of the pictures at 500 shutterspeed using f8 or f11 so that should be fine too.
I will attach a picture at 100% zoom in lightroom.
I scan using DSLR scanning and have also tryed a flatbad with same results.

Greetings,

Robert

koraks · Monday at 10:32 AM

Antaras said:
I do have a bit shaky hands sometimes but i shot some of the pictures at 500 shutterspeed using f8 or f11 so that should be fine too.

Yeah, and the unsharpness doesn't look like motion blur.

Can you post a full frame?
If you shoot a scene with objects at various distances from the camera, does anything render sharply (although not the objects you focused on, I assume)? If so, do objects closer or further away from the focus point render sharply?

Antaras said:
Checked the rangefinder patch allignment

How did you do this exactly?

Also, what camera are we talking about exactly? I assume this is one of the Fuji 6x9 rangefinders; I'm not familiar with a "GI690". Or am I misreading GL690?

Antaras · Monday at 10:42 AM

koraks said:
Yeah, and the unsharpness doesn't look like motion blur.

Can you post a full frame?
If you shoot a scene with objects at various distances from the camera, does anything render sharply (although not the objects you focused on, I assume)? If so, do objects closer or further away from the focus point render sharply?

How did you do this exactly?

Also, what camera are we talking about exactly? I assume this is one of the Fuji 6x9 rangefinders; I'm not familiar with a "GI690". Or am I misreading GL690?

Iam trying to post full frame but its not uploading somehow.
I did have something sharp once i think it was at 3-5 meters away, so i think further away more in focus.
I did the rangefinder patch check with a piece of negative on the back with bulb mode and a loupe at 2 meter away and it was sharp image.
Then i checked 2 meters for the rangefinder patch and it was in focus.
Also checked infinity with far away object and it was in focus.

Also good to mention.. i develop myself also.

Its is the GL690 fujica.

Could it be the Skylight filter attached to it?

Greetings,

Robert

blee1996 · Monday at 11:26 AM

You can check if the lens is actually in focus and matches with rangefinder. You can attach a ground glass to the film gate, keep the lens on T/B wide open, and use a loupe to check.

The Fujica GL690 and 100/3.5 lens can produce very sharp images. I used it extensively for landscape for many years.

GregY · Monday at 11:28 AM

Have you checked that there are not inconsistencies in your scanning set-up?
I have also used the GL690 and had fine results.

Antaras · Monday at 11:32 AM

GregY said:
Have you checked that there are not inconsistencies in your scanning set-up?
I have also used the GL690 and had fine results.

yes i have scanned with a flatbad and dslr same results.

Dali · Monday at 11:33 AM

Antaras, where this camera is coming from? Is this blurriness issue something new or not?

Antaras · Monday at 11:38 AM

Dali said:
Antaras, where this camera is coming from? Is this blurriness issue something new or not?

I bought the camera on ebay but i think .. its the skylight filter?

koraks · Monday at 11:59 AM

Antaras said:
I did the rangefinder patch check with a piece of negative on the back with bulb mode and a loupe at 2 meter away and it was sharp image.

In principle, this is a good approach, however, it's sensitive to proper alignment of the strip of negative etc. you use in the film gate. 120 film is pretty wide and the film is kind of flexible, so I'd suggest doing this test with a more rigid kind of material. Any kind of transparent plastic or even glass that you can rough up to make a makeshift ground glass will do. Make sure the coarse/ground surface faces the lens!
If this test succeeds, it's hard to maintain that it's a focus problem. I'd still love to see those full frame samples to see what's up. They don't have to be full resolution; on resized images it's usually still fairly easy to see where the focus is.

Antaras said:
Iam trying to post full frame but its not uploading somehow.

Maybe there's a useful suggestion in here somewhere: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/how-to-post-pictures-and-avoid-size-limit-problems.211668

Antaras said:
Also good to mention.. i develop myself also.

Good to mention, but it's not the cause of the problem.

Antaras said:
Could it be the Skylight filter attached to it?

Probably not, but test without the filter. Mind you, a filter would have to be very dirty and/or very very scratched to give this kind of result. Think of the old 'vaseline on a filter' trick to make a soft focus effect. A tiny scratch here and there or some dust on the filter won't do this. And a reasonably clear filter will also not affect sharpness by this degree - not by a long, long shot.

Sharktooth · Monday at 12:28 PM

Check the pressure plate in the camera back. Maybe it's missing, or the spring has been damaged and isn't pushing the film flat to the rails.

Antaras · Monday at 12:49 PM

koraks said:
In principle, this is a good approach, however, it's sensitive to proper alignment of the strip of negative etc. you use in the film gate. 120 film is pretty wide and the film is kind of flexible, so I'd suggest doing this test with a more rigid kind of material. Any kind of transparent plastic or even glass that you can rough up to make a makeshift ground glass will do. Make sure the coarse/ground surface faces the lens!
If this test succeeds, it's hard to maintain that it's a focus problem. I'd still love to see those full frame samples to see what's up. They don't have to be full resolution; on resized images it's usually still fairly easy to see where the focus is.

Maybe there's a useful suggestion in here somewhere: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/how-to-post-pictures-and-avoid-size-limit-problems.211668

Good to mention, but it's not the cause of the problem.

Probably not, but test without the filter. Mind you, a filter would have to be very dirty and/or very very scratched to give this kind of result. Think of the old 'vaseline on a filter' trick to make a soft focus effect. A tiny scratch here and there or some dust on the filter won't do this. And a reasonably clear filter will also not affect sharpness by this degree - not by a long, long shot.

Ok i checked the rangefinder patch again with the loupe.
Distance to subject 2 meters.
when i focus at 1 meter i get out of focus image to see.
But at 2 meters till infinity its all in focus at F3.5.

koraks · Monday at 12:55 PM

Antaras said:
when i focus at 1 meter i get out of focus image to see.
But at 2 meters till infinity its all in focus at F3.5.

I'm not quite sure I understand what you're saying here. By '2 meters till infinity' do you mean that if you set the rangefinder to an object at 2 meters and you verify the image on the makeshift groundglass, it's sharp? And if you repeat the same for an object at infinity, you also get confirmation between rangefinder and groundglass image?
If that's the case, focus at 1 meter should also be perfect. If it's not, then this suggests a problem with your methodology most likely, and the findings for 2m - infinity are also not as perfect as you believe they are.

GregY · Monday at 1:04 PM

koraks said:
I'm not quite sure I understand what you're saying here. By '2 meters till infinity' do you mean that if you set the rangefinder to an object at 2 meters and you verify the image on the makeshift groundglass, it's sharp? And if you repeat the same for an object at infinity, you also get confirmation between rangefinder and groundglass image?
If that's the case, focus at 1 meter should also be perfect. If it's not, then this suggests a problem with your methodology most likely, and the findings for 2m - infinity are also not as perfect as you believe they are.

I'd be interested in seeing how a negative looks through a loupe....not a judgement based on a scan. These are well-made and robust cameras. The one I owned had sustained a 20m rolling fall. I taped up the bent back where there was a light leak and continued to use it. No problems with image sharpness.

Antaras · Monday at 1:06 PM

Maybe i need to bring the camera to repair shop

koraks · Monday at 1:11 PM

GregY said:
I'd be interested in seeing how a negative looks through a loupe....not a judgement based on a scan.

You've got a point there. I see no grain in the scan either. That's suspicious.

Antaras · Monday at 1:17 PM

koraks said:
You've got a point there. I see no grain in the scan either. That's suspicious.

so could be the scan?

koraks · Monday at 1:26 PM

Antaras said:
so could be the scan?

Could be, yes. Plenty of ways to find out. Take some negatives that you know are sharp and scan them in the same way. Scan these negatives and include the edge of the film; verify that the edge is sharp. Mind you, there can be problems with field flatness of the taking lens you using during 'scanning', so there's that - but still, this should get you closer.

What kind of film was this negative made on?

Antaras · Monday at 1:31 PM

koraks said:
Could be, yes. Plenty of ways to find out. Take some negatives that you know are sharp and scan them in the same way. Scan these negatives and include the edge of the film; verify that the edge is sharp. Mind you, there can be problems with field flatness of the taking lens you using during 'scanning', so there's that - but still, this should get you closer.

What kind of film was this negative made on?

I used fp4 @ 400 iso.
and before that i also used tri-x 400.
all with more and less same results.

Antaras · Monday at 1:43 PM

I just did a scan with my digitaliza holder and somehow its already better result.

koraks · Monday at 1:44 PM

I'm asking because of the grain. If you had used something like TMAX100, the grain might have been difficult to see on a not-so-great scan. The grain of FP4+ should have shown up clearly in your scan.

Antaras said:
I just did a scan with my digitaliza holder and somehow its already better result.

Scanning is part of the problem, but probably not all of it. Btw, the second scan you posted is also not so great, but that's a different problem. I'd focus on the camera for now.

PS: for comparison, this is a snippet of a scan I was just working on now:

This is a pretty mediocre flatbed scan at effectively 1200dpi but from a very fine-grained film (Kodak Vision3 50D). You can already see the grain appearing on this low-res, soft scan (with some USM applied). Your FP4+ negative should show much more and tighter grain than this on a decent scan.

retina_restoration · Monday at 1:50 PM

If you can't see the grain in an FP4 negative when scanned, then it's a problem with your scanning technique, not the camera.
That said, it's always a good idea to verify the accuracy of the rangefinder when buying a new camera, but comparing what the rangefinder is telling you, with what a loupe and ground glass show you. If the rangefinder is inaccurate, you'll see it.

Antaras · Monday at 1:52 PM

koraks said:
I'm asking because of the grain. If you had used something like TMAX100, the grain might have been difficult to see on a not-so-great scan. The grain of FP4+ should have shown up clearly in your scan.

Scanning is part of the problem, but probably not all of it. Btw, the second scan you posted is also not so great, but that's a different problem. I'd focus on the camera for now.

PS: for comparison, this is a snippet of a scan I was just working on now:
View attachment 398950
This is a pretty mediocre flatbed scan at effectively 1200dpi but from a very fine-grained film (Kodak Vision3 50D). You can already see the grain appearing on this low-res, soft scan (with some USM applied). Your FP4+ negative should show much more and tighter grain than this on a decent scan.

I see..

GregY · Monday at 1:52 PM

koraks said:
I'm asking because of the grain. If you had used something like TMAX100, the grain might have been difficult to see on a not-so-great scan. The grain of FP4+ should have shown up clearly in your scan.

Scanning is part of the problem, but probably not all of it. Btw, the second scan you posted is also not so great, but that's a different problem. I'd focus on the camera for now.

I'd suggest some more accurate testing.
- put the camera on a tripod
-photograph non moving subjects at measured distances....from close to infinity

re: your scan. Can you assure that you didn't miss focus?....or the subject did not move?.....& what % of the image are we seeing on the scan....& what aperture was the photo made at?

koraks · Monday at 1:55 PM

GregY said:
I'd suggest some more accurate testing.

I agree, there are (too) many methodological issues at this stage to get a firm grip on the problem.

Antaras · Monday at 2:01 PM

Iam sure i didnt miss focus, it was non moving, the uploaded picture is 100% zoom of the image taken at F8 i believe and 500 shutterspeed.
I will look into my scanning method.

Thanks for helping out everyone!

Gl690 No sharp images.

Antaras

Attachments

koraks

Moderator

Antaras

blee1996

GregY

Antaras

Dali

Antaras

koraks

Moderator

Sharktooth

Antaras

koraks

Moderator

GregY

Antaras

koraks

Moderator

Antaras

koraks

Moderator

Antaras

Antaras

Attachments

koraks

Moderator

retina_restoration

Antaras

GregY

koraks

Moderator

Antaras

Gl690 No sharp images.

Attachments

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Attachments

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency