Problem with focus

[martellsv]

Hello, i have a problem with my SL66, when occasionally don´t use the tripod in Portraits 6x6 and 6x4.5 format, 80mm Lens and 150mm Lens usually.
I focus the eye, but in the enlarger/print there is another focus... (a read B. Thornton)
I am not sure what is the rule with this camera.

I can post a photo if neccesary. Thanks

 

[antmar]

Please check if the focusing screen is mounted correctly, if not this is a common symptom.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

this is indeed the most-likely culprit!

 

[brucemuir]

Are you using focus/recompose?
Focus on eye with a central split rangefinder/microprism screen the recomposing the shot after you have achieved focus?

If you use wide apertures this technique can cause slight back focus.

 

[markbarendt]

If you can get good focus with the camera on a tripod, it isn't your focus screen.

That the problem is occasional and hand held suggests that you or the subject simply moved a bit. This is normal, not a gear issue.

 

[martellsv]

I use a Maxwell Screen

I use a Maxwell Screen, Hi-Lux Brilliant Matte... is has no circle no microprism... no reference to focus...

Please, could you see My gallery (a have only one photo jajajaja) this photo is the example and the problem

Please check if the focusing screen is mounted correctly, if not this is a common symptom.

Could be, but i don´t know how check it, (apparently correct except i cannot distinguish the fresnel side)

If you use wide apertures this technique can cause slight back focus

f/4. 1/60 I read from rollei SL66 users a recomendation to focus tip of the nose...

Thanks a lot

 

[markbarendt]

Do you get proper focus on the tripod?

 

[markbarendt]

Your gallery hasn't got any photos I can see.

f/4. 1/60 I read from rollei SL66 users a recomendation to focus tip of the nose...

Why do they suggest this?

I find it tough to believe that all SL66's focus improperly. To me that sounds like an urban legend or rule of thumb rather than sound advice.

 

[markbarendt]

Ok think I finally found your photo (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

The eyes seem pretty sharp.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I focus the eye, but in the enlarger/print there is another focus... (a read B. Thornton)

What you are refering to is called the chemical focus and it was a problem when enlarging papers were only sensitive to the shorter wavelengths of the spectrum (violet and blue light). It is not a problem with film which is panchromatic in its response.

 

[removed account4]

if you are focusing with a tripod and everything is fine
and hand held it is slightly out of focus, at f4, it seems that
you have moved, or your subject has moved, ( or both ) so your focus
is a little off ... this is the same problem a lot of people have with LF ...
especially when one has to focus, stop lens down, insert film, pull dark slide
and make the exposure ( and the camera is usually on a tripod ) ...
maybe rollei suggests focusing on the nose to compensate for people moving forward
just a tiny bit, when someone is taking their portrait ...


john

 

[fotch]

That is a rather heavy camera to hand hold and shoot, at low shutter speeds. If photos are sharp on a tripod, then it is not a camera problem, rather, it is a photographer problem. JMHO

 

[martellsv]

The eyes seem pretty sharp.

IMHO, It could be camera digital reproduction excessive focus not a lot, and the lith help sommthing

That is a rather heavy camera to hand hold and shoot, at low shutter speeds. If photos are sharp on a tripod, then it is not a camera problem, rather, it is a photographer problem. JMHO

I usually have the same problem, exactly out of focus the defocus distance.... i don´t know how focus tha subject
to be sure tha exposure is ok, nowdays is a lottery ... always the same error
this is a headache...

NOw i am sure i have no problems with the screen, it´s correct thanks a lot J.

any recomendations? this afternoon i will try again, with my son, same conditions

 

[ic-racer]

When the film bulges in the film gate the focus will shift behind the subject.
You can confirm if the is the problem by taking the lens off and exposing at "B" with film in the film gate. When you touch the tip of a pencil to the film it should not move if it is against the pressure plate. If you see the film move or indent when touched with the tip of the pencil, the film is bulging.

The cure for this is to shoot 4x5 film That is what I do when I don't want to be bothered by rollfilm flatness.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

please elaborateon'chemical focus!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

please elaborateon'chemical focus!

Early plates were sensitive to blue-to-UV light. These wavelenths of light come to a different point of focus than the greenish wavelengths the eye is most sensitive to. So there was a visual focus and a chemical - sometimes called actinic - focus with the early non-achromatic lenses.
In diminishing wavelength (or increasing frequency) the colors of light are (infrared)red-orange-yellow-green-blue-indigo-violet(ultraviolet).

 

[Doremus Scudder]

please elaborateon'chemical focus!

Ralph,

It's a combination of two things. Some paper's sensitivity to UV and some lenses inability to focus UV at the same plane as other colors in the visible spectrum (which we use to focus).

Ctein elaborates on this in his "Post Exposure."

This was more of an issue in the past, and one of the reasons that blue filters came with some grain-focusing devices; by focusing on with blue, you'd be closer to the focus of the UV.

Nowadays this is rarely an issue: most lenses are better corrected and most papers are no longer so sensitive to UV. Plus, if one stops down a bit, which seems to be the practice more now than in the past, since papers are faster, you get a considerable depth of focus at the enlarging easel which alleviates this effect.

FWIW, I don't think the OP's problem has anything to do with chemical focus. Likely just difficulty hand-holding.

Best,

Doremus


www.DoremusScudder.com

 

[martellsv]

I was using SL66 and "45 degree prism"f/4 1/60 with a magazine 6x4.5 TMAX 100, and not the usual Waist Level and 400 ISO, dificult to get sharpness, precision ... with focus at some situation, portrait with SL66 and "45º degree" i don´t like Likely with hand-holding.

of course ... waist level is far better, it could help a 400 iso film and not 100... thanks

 

[martellsv]

I was using SL66 (the camera about three kgrs.) and "45 degree prism"f/4 1/60 with a magazine 6x4.5 TMAX 100, and not the usual Waist Level and 400 ISO, dificult to get sharpness, precision ... with focus at some situation, portrait with SL66 and "45º degree" i don´t like Likely with hand-holding. IMHO waist level is far better, it could help a 400 iso film and not 100... thanks