Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,491   Posts: 1,542,965   Online: 868
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57
  1. #11
    PeterB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    597
    In the hope that someone already subscribed to this thread has an idea, I have tried numerous things already to fix my C330f focusing problem only to be stumped. You can see my question here.
    thanks
    Peter

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    139
    Does the problem exist with multiple lenses, or just one. I once owned a 55mm lens that was simply soft for unknown reasons. I replaced it with a different one that is sharp.

  3. #13
    PeterB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    597
    I only own the 80mm lens. The image is VERY sharp once it is focused. The problem is that the when the viewing screen is in focus, the image isn't in focus on the film plane.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dunedin,New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    269
    I had the same problem you describe. For some reason,the magnifier in the waist-level finder finder did not focus properly on the ground glass. I had to do some surgery to bring the two into alignment.
    Very strange,because the finder was in excellent shape,and not damaged in any way.
    My dual-magnification chimney finder needed a similar adjustment to bring the swing-in second element into alignment.

  5. #15
    PeterB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    597
    Thanks smudger. Your description of the problem is the first I have encountered in any forum (and I've been combing them for solutions for weeks now) and I'm sceptical about the explanation. It doesn't make sense that if the original magnifier in the waist level finder (WLF) is not positioned correctly that it would prevent one from focusing. Sure the image viewed through the WLF won't be sharp, but at least when it is as sharp as it can get then that is the right point. I can't see a need to add a second lens in the WLF. Please try and convince me otherwise.

  6. #16
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,369
    Images
    60
    Has someone installed an accessory diopter correction lens in your WLF magnifier?
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  7. #17
    PeterB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    597
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Has someone installed an accessory diopter correction lens in your WLF magnifier?
    Not AFAIK. I will check tonight though, BUT even if they had how is that going to make a difference to the optimal point of focus ?? I have glasses that I sometimes wear to sharpen things in the distance. The problem I see with my C330f's mismatched focus is identical (to within limits of repeatability) whether I put my glasses on or not. Therefore if the WLF lens' diopter isn't the original default, and I swapped the default back in, this is identical to me focussing with my glasses on or off.

    Sure things will come to a sharper focus with my glasses on (or with the default WLF diopter viewed by somebody who doesn't use glasses), but this shouldn't change the actual optimal position of the main lens assembly on the track/rail.

    Matt, your suggestion is based on the same false premise as smudger which I attempted to counter in my above reply to him.

  8. #18
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,369
    Images
    60
    Peter:

    I agree that an incorrect diopter would merely make it more difficult to determine visual focus. I guess I was responding more to the OP's description of his camera.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  9. #19
    PeterB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    597
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Peter:

    I agree that an incorrect diopter would merely make it more difficult to determine visual focus. I guess I was responding more to the OP's description of his camera.
    Yes, your reply makes sense now Matt. I think I might need to purchase the camera's service manual to determine the cause of my focus discrepancies.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,416
    Depending on the screen, the sharpest point doesn't look that sharp. Mine is C3 with old fashioned ground glass, which is easy to reach the optimum focus point, but the image is rather dark and coarse.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin