--
Well-known
HELP!
1) How does rangefinder misalignment manifest itself – can it somehow be seen in the viewfinder or is it only to determine through resulting faulty focusing?
2) When looking in the user manual of the R-D1s (page 16) and on Rich’s site http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_04.htm]
http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_04.htm
it looks as if the double image focusing area is dead-centre. On my camera it is slight offset to the upper left area – is that standard? As I use glasses I simply cannot be sure that I am squaring up correctly to the viewfinder :bang:
The reasons I am asking this is that I suddenly noticed a certain softness in the lower right corner of newer pictures at close range. I believe it stems from the slightly larger distance to the lower right corner of the picture than to the focusing area – it is thus most articulated at large apertures and diminishes somewhat at smaller apertures.
So, please – put me out of my misery – shoot me if you have to – is my camera normal? Even though its owner is not
All jokes welcomed.... advice too.
PS: My film camera has its double image focusing square off centre and I am certain it is not out of alignment
1) How does rangefinder misalignment manifest itself – can it somehow be seen in the viewfinder or is it only to determine through resulting faulty focusing?
2) When looking in the user manual of the R-D1s (page 16) and on Rich’s site http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_04.htm]
http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_04.htm
it looks as if the double image focusing area is dead-centre. On my camera it is slight offset to the upper left area – is that standard? As I use glasses I simply cannot be sure that I am squaring up correctly to the viewfinder :bang:
The reasons I am asking this is that I suddenly noticed a certain softness in the lower right corner of newer pictures at close range. I believe it stems from the slightly larger distance to the lower right corner of the picture than to the focusing area – it is thus most articulated at large apertures and diminishes somewhat at smaller apertures.
So, please – put me out of my misery – shoot me if you have to – is my camera normal? Even though its owner is not
All jokes welcomed.... advice too.
PS: My film camera has its double image focusing square off centre and I am certain it is not out of alignment
Last edited:
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
This is not rangefinder misalignment. This has to do with the placement of the patch in the RF window. Many RF cameras move the center patch as you focus in to correct for parallax error as you focus close. On R-D1's the RF patch is often slightly tilted and are often not centered. Don't worry. Use the camera. Be happy.
RF misallignment means that the two images in the RF patch do not line up (e.g. when focussed, one appears on top of the other rather than having them coincide when the camera is focussed). This does not necessarily affect RF accuracy, but it is a pain.
Softness of images in the lower-right corner is not a symptom of RF misallignment -- it sounds like decentering of, or a serious amount of fungus in, a lens (not so serious, just use different lens) or misallignment of the sensor in the camera (very serious).
Some lenses have a flat field, some have field curvature. You need to know which you've got (hint - take a shot of a brick wall). Notwithstanding this, a well-centered lens should exhibit its characteristic rendering of the world symmetrically (e.g on either side of the lens' axis).
Ben
RF misallignment means that the two images in the RF patch do not line up (e.g. when focussed, one appears on top of the other rather than having them coincide when the camera is focussed). This does not necessarily affect RF accuracy, but it is a pain.
Softness of images in the lower-right corner is not a symptom of RF misallignment -- it sounds like decentering of, or a serious amount of fungus in, a lens (not so serious, just use different lens) or misallignment of the sensor in the camera (very serious).
Some lenses have a flat field, some have field curvature. You need to know which you've got (hint - take a shot of a brick wall). Notwithstanding this, a well-centered lens should exhibit its characteristic rendering of the world symmetrically (e.g on either side of the lens' axis).
Ben
--
Well-known
Thanks for your quick reply.
Thanks again Benjamin.
/karspoul
One hurdle cleared (up).Benjamin Marks said:
The lens is brand new (as is the camera) and there is no fungus to see nor smell. Also the sensor looks like it sits perfectly square but I guess it is not much it need to be out of place to cause problems. I guess I will have to get out with a tripod and shoot some pictures. Fortunately I have got a year's warranty.
Thanks again Benjamin.
/karspoul
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Sensor misallignment of this type will not necessarily be obvious on visual inspection. A few thousanths of an inch would be enough. To test for this, allign your camera to be parallel with a brick wall (use a tripod). Make an exposure with the lens wide open. Check corner focus. Luckily, on a digital camera you will be able to get feedback on this right away.
There is, I should have mentioned, another kind of RF misallignment -- this is when the RF is not accurately adjusted for proper focus (e.g. camera is actually focussing a little bit in front of, or behind, the indicated plane of focus). You seem to have no problem with images in the center of the frame, so I assume that the RF is well adjusted.
What kind of lens?
Ben
There is, I should have mentioned, another kind of RF misallignment -- this is when the RF is not accurately adjusted for proper focus (e.g. camera is actually focussing a little bit in front of, or behind, the indicated plane of focus). You seem to have no problem with images in the center of the frame, so I assume that the RF is well adjusted.
What kind of lens?
Ben
--
Well-known
Benjamin Marks said:
Thanks for the update. It is a Voigtländer 35mm Pancake II
zetablues
Established
it's normal, it has to do with distance setting on the glass, infinity: the focussing patch is in the middle of the frame, nearer: the patch moves towards the upper left cornerxpanded said:
hth
cheers
Last edited:
--
Well-known
Update
Update
I finally got light enough to make a test and after finishing it sent the results to the seller Robert White. Has anybody seen something like it before?
TEST METHODOLOGY (or lack of)
With no brick wall around that is good enough for testing I have put up a simple test setup: four pages of print from an Excel sheet.
With the camera
I then:
a)converted these pictures in the PhotoRaw software,
b)saved them in tiff format (8-bit),
c)opened them in Photoshop Elements 3.0
d)saved two versions
a.no sharpening at all
b.my R-D1s standard sharpening
i.amount 150%
ii.radius 2 pixels
iii.threshold 3 levels
e)resized them
The findings are very significant – both without sharpening and with sharpening the lower right side has the “shaken” view. Not surprisingly this is more pronounced at the large aperture f2.5 than at f11.
There is nothing to see on the lens’ front and rear elements – they look absolutely fine and I can see nothing on the sensor either.
Update
I finally got light enough to make a test and after finishing it sent the results to the seller Robert White. Has anybody seen something like it before?
TEST METHODOLOGY (or lack of)
With no brick wall around that is good enough for testing I have put up a simple test setup: four pages of print from an Excel sheet.
With the camera
- mounted on a tripod
- using a cable release
- right and left side of camera at the same distance to the motif
- at ISO 200
- with no exposure correction (I usually shoot at +2/3 stop)
I then:
a)converted these pictures in the PhotoRaw software,
b)saved them in tiff format (8-bit),
c)opened them in Photoshop Elements 3.0
d)saved two versions
a.no sharpening at all
b.my R-D1s standard sharpening
i.amount 150%
ii.radius 2 pixels
iii.threshold 3 levels
e)resized them
The findings are very significant – both without sharpening and with sharpening the lower right side has the “shaken” view. Not surprisingly this is more pronounced at the large aperture f2.5 than at f11.
There is nothing to see on the lens’ front and rear elements – they look absolutely fine and I can see nothing on the sensor either.
Attachments
LCT
ex-newbie
This looks like a lens issue at first glance. Did you try another one?
--
Well-known
not yet...
not yet...
Hope to be able to do it tomorrow. I really, really wish you are right - it would be so much easier.
not yet...
LCT said:
Hope to be able to do it tomorrow. I really, really wish you are right - it would be so much easier.
LCT
ex-newbie
Yes i would not worry until i try another lens if i were you.
RF-Addict
Well-known
I agree, this is most likely a lens issue. It is common for lenses to be softer in the corners. Return the lens and exchange it - there always have been variations in lens quality.
--
Well-known
Heads up
Heads up
RobertWhite is shipping me another lens (going with a Zeiss this time). With that I will be able to determine the problem. If it is the lens I just have to return the Voigtländer and pay the difference. If it is the camera the whole lot goes back for inspection.
This is an approach I like in a photo dealer. Mutual trust and I can continue shooting with my combo despite "the issue" and will only be left naked if it is the camera (hope not!).
Cheers,
Karspoul
Heads up
RobertWhite is shipping me another lens (going with a Zeiss this time). With that I will be able to determine the problem. If it is the lens I just have to return the Voigtländer and pay the difference. If it is the camera the whole lot goes back for inspection.
This is an approach I like in a photo dealer. Mutual trust and I can continue shooting with my combo despite "the issue" and will only be left naked if it is the camera (hope not!).
Cheers,
Karspoul
jamxo
work in progress
Robert White are consistently awesome.
--
Well-known
Hu
Hu
Just read a post in the M8 forum about a buyer's problems and how a Leica dealer (whom had not even sold the body) stepped in an offered help.
This reminded me that I never finished this story and since it speaks volumes of another good dealer out there here goes.
I got the Zeiss lens but it did not suit me. Without any problems I returned it and got the original Voigtländer lens replaced. Being so pleased about the service from Robert White I took advantage of their 25 years anniversary and bought a 50mm and a 21mm as well.
I ain't gonna look nowhere else for shopping M-related wares in the future.
Hu
Just read a post in the M8 forum about a buyer's problems and how a Leica dealer (whom had not even sold the body) stepped in an offered help.
This reminded me that I never finished this story and since it speaks volumes of another good dealer out there here goes.
I got the Zeiss lens but it did not suit me. Without any problems I returned it and got the original Voigtländer lens replaced. Being so pleased about the service from Robert White I took advantage of their 25 years anniversary and bought a 50mm and a 21mm as well.
I ain't gonna look nowhere else for shopping M-related wares in the future.