Jump to content

Is the Elmar-M 90mm on the soft side on the M8?


wlaidlaw

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have just been doing a print off a photo I took with the Elmar-M 90mm on the M8. It is a fairly recent lens with a serial number of 3890339. The photo would have been taken about f5.6. I have done a 60% crop and printed at A3+ size (329 x 483mm). I have to say that while pleasant from a distance, the shot is a bit on the soft side. There are a lot of things in the photo at different distances, so I can tell it is a not a focus issue, Where I expected it to be at its sharpest, it is. Am I just pushing the envelope too far with a 60% crop and an A3+ print with this lens? I tried allowing the print menu to upsize and also the alternative route of upsizing in Photoshop (bi-cubic) and then printing at the actual size but this did not appear to make any difference. I am using an HP Photosmart Pro B9180 printer. I have just taken a couple of test shots from my patio with the E90, cropped and printed at A3+ and they are also just a tad soft. Any thoughts anyone?

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

Hi Wilson,

 

I also use the Elmar 90, serial number 3975208, and have also been having problems to get a sharp image. In my case it can be traced to backfocus. I'm attaching an image of the focus test sheet, showing about 40% of the original image. As you can see at the 12 to 14mm mark, this lens is tack sharp.

 

One thing that I did have in the past, when extending the lens, there seems to be some or other stop at about 2mm from being fully extended. Just turn the lens a little to the left or the right while gently pulling at the same time. It normaly comes out all the way then. In that "semi-extended" condition, you get very soft images.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Andreas

Link to post
Share on other sites

At f 5.6 it should not be soft - period. Now we get in the realm of speculation: mini camera shake? something with the lens? post-processing problem? whatever. Let us know if this problem arises on all your shots. From your post I feel it is camera shake. With the sensor crop and the 60% crop you are in the equivalent FOV of about a 250 mm lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At f 5.6 it should not be soft - period. Now we get in the realm of speculation: mini camera shake? something with the lens? post-processing problem? whatever. Let us know if this problem arises on all your shots. From your post I feel it is camera shake. With the sensor crop and the 60% crop you are in the equivalent FOV of about a 250 mm lens.

 

Jaap,

 

I think you are right and it is camera shake. I checked the EXIF on the shot that particularly concerned me and it was only 1/125. I know I don't have very steady hands, so maybe I just need to go open perhaps two more stops and get the shutter speed up a bit. I will do some tests tomorrow on and off a tripod (it is a big heavy Manfrotto 190, so no shake on that) to see if I can pin down that it is what we think.

 

Andreas,

 

This is the Elmar-M f2.8 not the collapsible one. I will print out a focus test sheet to check back focus but, as I mentioned on my original post, the point of sharpest focus was correct.

 

Thanks for help and suggestions.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wilson,

 

I also use the Elmar 90, serial number 3975208, and have also been having problems to get a sharp image. In my case it can be traced to backfocus. I'm attaching an image of the focus test sheet, showing about 40% of the original image. As you can see at the 12 to 14mm mark, this lens is tack sharp.

 

One thing that I did have in the past, when extending the lens, there seems to be some or other stop at about 2mm from being fully extended. Just turn the lens a little to the left or the right while gently pulling at the same time. It normaly comes out all the way then. In that "semi-extended" condition, you get very soft images.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Andreas

 

Andreas,

 

Here is a test from the Elmar-M 90/2.8. Taken at f2.8 at 1200mm. Focus looks fine and on the assumption that DOF should be 2/3 in front and 1/3 behind, it might actually be front focusing by about 4mm. I think this is acceptable.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...