Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

haze ? cloud? fungus?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:47 pm    Post subject: haze ? cloud? fungus? Reply with quote

Sorry for a newbie question:

What is this: fungus? haze? cloud?



this is the description from the ebay seller with 99.1 feedback: Click here to see on Ebay
Quote:

Glass is clean and clear, no haze, fungus or scratches.
Evil or Very Mad


PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like damage to the coating to me. It doesn't look like fungus, although it's possible this was the cause of the damage. I have two lenses a bit like this and, apart from possibly a small reduction in contrast, I doubt you'll notice any difference.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:15 pm    Post subject: Re: haze ? cloud? fungus? Reply with quote

bogolisk wrote:
this is the description from the ebay seller with 99.1 feedback: Click here to see on Ebay
Quote:

Glass is clean and clear, no haze, fungus or scratches.
Evil or Very Mad


Regardless of how the lens performs, this is clearly a not-as-described item. I would be complaining to the seller for sure. Confused


PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:59 pm    Post subject: Re: haze ? cloud? fungus? Reply with quote

Scheimpflug wrote:
bogolisk wrote:
this is the description from the ebay seller with 99.1 feedback: Click here to see on Ebay
Quote:

Glass is clean and clear, no haze, fungus or scratches.
Evil or Very Mad


Regardless of how the lens performs, this is clearly a not-as-described item. I would be complaining to the seller for sure. Confused


yes I did complain! I paid $12+s/h and he offers $10.00 back. It sux I don't want the hassle of going thru a paypal dispute. Anyway, I up the contrast in post and the pics don't look too bad. wide open (f2.Cool on e-p1:



PostPosted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
Looks like damage to the coating to me. It doesn't look like fungus, although it's possible this was the cause of the damage. I have two lenses a bit like this and, apart from possibly a small reduction in contrast, I doubt you'll notice any difference.


+1


PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bogolisk..

Why do you make an complaint when you get a nice piece of glass for nothing?? Very Happy

tf


PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe somebody tried to clean a haze off the back side of the front element and did not know what they were doing. If you remove that element and clean with FLITZ paste (only use a small bit of it), you may see that lens element very clear again. You may lose the remaining coating, but at this point we must be honest: it isn't doing much good anyway.
Jon

I have seen this many times in the Minolta 58mm 1.4 lens and the cure is always the same...


PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It could be that the fungus was cleared but it damaged the coating. I have a pentacon 50mm 1.8 damaged like this, smaller damage, and it is one of my best 50mm.

Well like someone on this forum said that some of his best lenses were uncoated, don't remember exactly who.

Anyway looks like a nice lens from your test foto.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

trifox wrote:
Why do you make an complaint when you get a nice piece of glass for nothing?? Very Happy


There are good reasons. Sometimes, you pay more in shipping than you did for the lens.. so if you wanted a certain lens in good condition, receiving one in worse condition than you want, even for "free", still means you are at a loss after the shipping. Neutral

Not that the lens is horrible or unusable, just that you've spent money, wasted time, and in the end, you have not received what you need. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 6:37 pm    Post subject: Re: haze ? cloud? fungus? Reply with quote

bogolisk wrote:


yes I did complain! I paid $12+s/h and he offers $10.00 back. It sux I don't want the hassle of going thru a paypal dispute. Anyway, I up the contrast in post and the pics don't look too bad. wide open (f2.Cool on e-p1:


I would try to shoot straight into the sun or some light source. Like test on flares or ghosts =/
...but nevertheless look like cheap glass.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

€BAY has started to suck, really.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, guys, maybe what I am going to say will not please someone, but here's my take on the subject: when the price of a lens is in the 10-20 dollars range, you always have to take the sellers descriptions with a lot of doubt.
This is not a justification for the dishonest seller; but wanting to be as cheap as it can be (I mean to buy the cheapest possible) is an attitude that may pay big sometimes, but it also exposes you to risks, because when people sells cheap, it usually means that the item has some issues, or they just don't care at all to make a good ad for a USD10 income.

The solution? Buy less, but spend more and stay on the safer side.
Is it worth to buy frm a seller with negatives, or a seller that makes incomplete description, or that is vague, or shows bad photos, or... et c. et c.... to save 20 bucks?
I don't think so.
Examine all auctions and all dealers, look at the past feedbacks, see how well the object is described, make questions before buying, and when it is time to decide, buy only if there is one source that looks entirely safe - if there is none, or if you have doubts, or if you hear a little voice inside your head, do not take risks just to save a few bucks; delay the purchase, and try again one month later.

All in all, it is often our selves at the origin of most bad choices.