leica m3 troubleshooting soft focus

[cpding]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is my first forum post. Apologies if this is the wrong forum for my question--please tell me if I should post in another forum for this.

I inherited my grandfather's doublestroke m3 and started to return to film photography with it. After reading lots of reviews, I bought a new Zeiss 50mm Planar f/2--it is generally reviewed as exceptionally sharp. I just got back my first few rolls of film think that the images all suffer from a softness. I know there are several variables at play here, but I wanted other opinions on how to trouble shoot this. The images were shot on Kodak Portra 160 and professionally developed. I scanned using my Epson v600 with silverfast 8, 3200 ppi. I also have a medium format camera and have gotten extremely crisp images using the same setup. The leica/zeiss images all seem soft to me. I'm wondering if this is 1) a focus issue, 2) some defect with the lens (purchased new over ebay from Japan), 3) a scanning issue, 4) this is normal for 35mm film scans and my expectations are biased by coming from medium format. I do no think the softness is due to camera shake because I'm seeing it in all images and they were mostly taken at a shutter speed faster than 1/125.

thanks for any advice.

Here is a sample image:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

and here is a 100% enlargment.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[UliWer]

I don‘t see softness, neither of the lens or of camera’s misalignment. It looks much more as if the scan was rather „grainy“. You cannot exspect a photo taken on film and scanned being as „sharp“ as one taken with a digial camera with. If you would print the photo on paper you would probably be content. 

[UliWer]

Here you have an example from the M3 with a "rigid" Summicron, approx. the same crop as on your example:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

It is less "sharp" as you would expect from an old Summicron compared to a current Planar. Though it is also less grainy, perhaps because the film has less grain but certainly because the scan with a Nikon Coolscan 5000 is finer.  

[a.noctilux]

To the OP, I see nothing wrong with the sample images.

Film have some grains too.

In the 100% crop, we see grains, so the "sharpness"is at best from the combo M+ lens + film in use + scan.

 

Your expectation may be more than the gear in use.

[hepcat]

44 minutes ago, cpding said:

This is my first forum post. Apologies if this is the wrong forum for my question--please tell me if I should post in another forum for this.

I inherited my grandfather's doublestroke m3 and started to return to film photography with it. After reading lots of reviews, I bought a new Zeiss 50mm Planar f/2--it is generally reviewed as exceptionally sharp. I just got back my first few rolls of film think that the images all suffer from a softness. I know there are several variables at play here, but I wanted other opinions on how to trouble shoot this. The images were shot on Kodak Portra 160 and professionally developed. I scanned using my Epson v600 with silverfast 8, 3200 ppi. I also have a medium format camera and have gotten extremely crisp images using the same setup. The leica/zeiss images all seem soft to me. I'm wondering if this is 1) a focus issue, 2) some defect with the lens (purchased new over ebay from Japan), 3) a scanning issue, 4) this is normal for 35mm film scans and my expectations are biased by coming from medium format. I do no think the softness is due to camera shake because I'm seeing it in all images and they were mostly taken at a shutter speed faster than 1/125.

thanks for any advice.

Here is a sample image:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

and here is a 100% enlargment.

You are in the right forum, no issues there.  "Softness" is a very subjective term subject to many variables.  The image you posted looks like it's about as "sharp" as one can expect from film.  Film can't resolve lines per mm smaller than it's grain.    In order to decide if your camera/lens combo really has "softness" issues (and I don't believe it does,) you really can't tell anything from a single snapshot... or series of snapshots.  You need to do a bench test at a fixed distance with a resolution test chart.  And it would be good to do it with two or three types of film that you intend to use so you have a known set of emulsions, exposures, and focus for you to examine.   It wouldn't hurt to do the same thing with another "known" camera/lens combo for comparison.   Other than a subjective eye-balling, as you've asked us to do here, that's really the only way to know if there is a problem.   My "eyeball" says there isn't.

[spydrxx]

I'm in agreement that any "softness" is a combination of factors, namely: film + scan. In essence it is a photo of a photo, so you can't expect it to look like a digital image, especially online where it has been compressed. Now if you had a paper enlargement, I doubt you would say it was soft. BTW I have the sme lens and can categorically state that it is sharp and contrasty.

[williamj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, cpding said:

This is my first forum post. Apologies if this is the wrong forum for my question--please tell me if I should post in another forum for this.

I inherited my grandfather's doublestroke m3 and started to return to film photography with it. After reading lots of reviews, I bought a new Zeiss 50mm Planar f/2--it is generally reviewed as exceptionally sharp. I just got back my first few rolls of film think that the images all suffer from a softness. I know there are several variables at play here, but I wanted other opinions on how to trouble shoot this. The images were shot on Kodak Portra 160 and professionally developed. I scanned using my Epson v600 with silverfast 8, 3200 ppi. I also have a medium format camera and have gotten extremely crisp images using the same setup. The leica/zeiss images all seem soft to me. I'm wondering if this is 1) a focus issue, 2) some defect with the lens (purchased new over ebay from Japan), 3) a scanning issue, 4) this is normal for 35mm film scans and my expectations are biased by coming from medium format. I do no think the softness is due to camera shake because I'm seeing it in all images and they were mostly taken at a shutter speed faster than 1/125.

thanks for any advice.

Here is a sample image:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

and here is a 100% enlargment.

If I can add to what everyone has said, I would make the following comments. The sharpest part of the image is not the faces of the people but the fence behind them so I think it might be worth checking the focus accuracy of the camera. A good way forward is a target at say 2 metres (2.2 yards) that includes a tape measure with the lens at f2. In addition, if you rack the lens out to infinity the image on the horizon should be sharp.

Also you're comparing medium format film to 35 mm film. I'm guessing this photo was shot at either f16 or f11, since you were using ISO 160 film and it is broad daylight. However, with modern lenses for 35 mm such as the Zeiss Planar, their best images are at f4 through to f8. With medium format on the other hand, the sharpest images will usually be at f11 and f16. So if you're used to seeing really sharp images with medium format at f11 or f16 then your 35 mm images at f16 will seem soft. Cheers.

[Fotoklaus]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb UliWer:

Here you have an example from the M3 with a "rigid" Summicron, approx. the same crop as on your example:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

It is less "sharp" as you would expect from an old Summicron compared to a current Planar. Though it is also less grainy, perhaps because the film has less grain but certainly because the scan with a Nikon Coolscan 5000 is finer.  

This seems just out of focus, unless the scan quality does not transfer more quality.

[Fotoklaus]

M3, Elmar 2,8/50, Original and crop.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[250swb]

@cpding again I'm not seeing a softness problem as such but your scanning isn't helping. An Epson V600 like all the flatbed range including the V850 are poor at scanning 35mm but fairly good at scanning medium format. The effective resolution of the Epson V600 for 35mm is only 1560ppi which is half the resolution you scanned it at, and far, far less than the 6400ppi claimed by Epson. So you are just interpolating pixels to make a bigger file which in turn doesn't help in managing expectations, bigger after all is supposed to be better. As this article says you could do better copying a negative with a cheap digital camera, and it makes the point that film scans with the V600 seemed blurry and un-sharp...

https://www.filmscanner.info/en/EpsonPerfectionV600Photo.html

 

[Mr.Prime]

I never had any luck scanning 35mm film on a flatbed, the results were usually poor. Your scan actually looks pretty decent to me in comparison to my own experiences. I ended up buying a dedicated 35mm scanner from Plustek and I'm much happier with the results.