evb
Member
Thanks for your reply!
My 45 degree angle was imprecise but on any other AF system there was no problem. Nevertheless I would admit that here I was not right if the normal shots would be OK. But 95% of them are out of focus
Mine doesn't focus on any
S
Socke
Guest
just tried it with my silver sticker G1, very worn and still not serviced although I planned it some 4 years ago, and my G2. G1 shows 88cm and G2 shows 87, tapemeasure reads 87.4 cm. Good enough
And I too like the 35, IMHO better for B/W then the 45 which I like better on slide film.
And I too like the 35, IMHO better for B/W then the 45 which I like better on slide film.
evb
Member
My camera seems to show correct (or near to correct) distance, as far as I tested it. But real shooting gives results with blurred main objectjust tried it with my silver sticker G1, very worn and still not serviced although I planned it some 4 years ago, and my G2. G1 shows 88cm and G2 shows 87, tapemeasure reads 87.4 cm. Good enough
mcgrattan
Well-known
I shot a test shot with my new G1 - real world test. Focused on the text on the bottle of cooking oil. Wide-open. Looks accurate enough to me.
Any softness is a little hand-shake. It was hand-held at a pretty slow shutter speed.
Any softness is a little hand-shake. It was hand-held at a pretty slow shutter speed.
Issy
Well-known
just tried it with my silver sticker G1, very worn and still not serviced although I planned it some 4 years ago, and my G2. G1 shows 88cm and G2 shows 87, tapemeasure reads 87.4 cm. Good enough
And I too like the 35, IMHO better for B/W then the 45 which I like better on slide film.
I would use the camera distance scale as a ballpark only... don't try to assess focus accuracy/repeatability by it. The proof is indeed in the images.
b
S
Socke
Guest
My camera seems to show correct (or near to correct) distance, as far as I tested it. But real shooting gives results with blurred main object
So there is something wrong. Hard to find if it's the focusing mechanism in the camera or in the lens without another lens or body.
I'd try and locate another lens, I'm sure that a missaligned lens is more probable than a missaligned focus mechanism in the camera.
It is made to start at infinity and relies on the lens to be set to infinity when not focused.
I have frontfocusing issues with an old Sigma lens on my 5D and I have never experienced something like that on both my Gs.
evb
Member
Thanks for your post.
I've had some back/front-focus issues with my DSLRs and it seems to me that the situation might be a bit more complicated. So, I had some lenses which focused well on one camera and wrong on another. And I had cameras which worked well with one lens and wrong with another.
The 45/2 lens was bought in LN condition so it's very difficult to imagine any real problems with it.
I've arranged a meeting with a person who owns several G-lenses at the end of this week, so soon I hope to know the reason
Unfortunately KEH hasn't answered my question yet...
joachim
Convicted Ektachome user
I second that. E.g. the problems with the look-up table will not show up on the read-out. One has to see the images.
evb
Member
OK, now I have to only wait for an answer from KEH. No answer yet
wayneb
Established
I don't really have any advice about whether this is a problem but a real world example might be a useful "second opinion". For example a person where you want the tip of the nose to be in focus, a second shot where the eye is in focus.
Focusing on a piece of mostly white paper in a dark room, especially if you just did it based on the distance scale in the viewfinder, seems like a test where you might need to take several readings/shots before getting it correct.
Focusing on a piece of mostly white paper in a dark room, especially if you just did it based on the distance scale in the viewfinder, seems like a test where you might need to take several readings/shots before getting it correct.
evb
Member
I've already shot and processed 2 rolls of film. Most of shots where I pointed to the model's eye, are sharp somewhere near the ear. I can show some of them here but I don't know if it makes any sense...
I focused pointing the brackets at the thick black line and then pressing the shutter release button. I used the distance scale only for reference, not for focusing.
S
Socke
Guest
This is a snapshot in a bar with incandescent light and fill flash with the G2 and the Sonnar 90/2.8 on Fortepan 400 developed in Tetenal Ultrafin Liquid. So neither made for sharpness nor small grain
But one can see that the camera focused perfectly well on the rim of her glasses
Not the cameras fault, but as I said, it was a snapshot and I didn't plan for it nor had I time to focus on her eye.
http://www.hett.org/gallery2/v/Menschen/marcia.jpg.html
But one can see that the camera focused perfectly well on the rim of her glasses
Not the cameras fault, but as I said, it was a snapshot and I didn't plan for it nor had I time to focus on her eye.
http://www.hett.org/gallery2/v/Menschen/marcia.jpg.html
evb
Member
Thanks for your photo. I've already understood that I'd better have taken G2 instead of G1.This is a snapshot in a bar with incandescent light and fill flash with the G2 and the Sonnar 90/2.8 on Fortepan 400 developed in Tetenal Ultrafin Liquid. So neither made for sharpness nor small grain
But one can see that the camera focused perfectly well on the rim of her glasses
Not the cameras fault, but as I said, it was a snapshot and I didn't plan for it nor had I time to focus on her eye.
http://www.hett.org/gallery2/v/Menschen/marcia.jpg.html
S
Socke
Guest
Thanks for your photo. I've already understood that I'd better have taken G2 instead of G1.
I prefer the G2 over the G1, it is only slightly bigger but I like the focusing wheel and the separate shutter and exposure compensation dials better.
I use manual exposure often, especially with flash, and sometimes zone focus, so the G2 control layout fits me better.
The G1 is my backup or second body with the lesser used film or lens.
