View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 835
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:43 am Post subject: Soligor 100mm f/2, worth to keep? |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
Got a Soligor 100mm f/2, pretty rare lens. Overall condition is good. One problem is an inner lens element has very thin irregular shaped haze covering the entire element and the inner element has many scratches. It looks like someone tried to cleaned the haze and couldn't do a decent job. I understand the haze sometimes is hard to clean due to coating damage. Another thing is it is in OM mount and I never have an OM mount lens before. The mount has two tabs. By pressing and holding the tabs, the lens is in manual mode, similar to the A/M switch in a M42 lens. However, somehow I have to hold the two tabs and can't really engage this manual mode without releasing my fingers. While in a M42 lens, placing the switch to the M position will engage the manual mode. So is there anything wrong with this OM mount or I didn't do it correctly, or after mounting on an Olympus body, the manual mode can be engaged with the camera body/mount.
Here is a photo showing the scratches and haze (more dominant in the center portion); I placed a flashlight from the lens rear. Under regular light, the glass doesn't seem to be this bad.
The lens was sold for around $100. Do you guys think it is worth to keep it? Thanks very much!
#1
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3751 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
You might re-polish the affected suface with cerium oxide:
https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company-us/all-3m-products/~/3M-Glass-Polishing-Compound/?N=5002385+3293082872&rt=rud
Of course, that surface will loose its (single) coating. Probably this won't influence the original performance of the lens (it's just one uncoated surface, and up to six uncoated surfaces were considered acceptable in old days).
Stephan _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 835
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
Thanks. I think polishing and probably recoating is the ultimate cure; but this work is too delicate without the right machinery. Have you ever done this? How to control the thickness to be polished and also keep the curvature of the lens? I am thinking of making a reverse mold first. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008 Posts: 6627 Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
I have seen some cases like this.
If its just coating damage and not actual scratches the coating can be polished off with a very light scrubbing with polishing compound, and the practical effect on the lens will be negligible.
But test the lens first, as coating damage may not really affect results in the first place.
It might be good enough as it is.
Actual scratches are quite difficult to remove with polishing compounds. Or not at all.
I have tried to repair badly scratched lenses before, one being a Nikkor 50/1.4 front element in an otherwise mint lens.
The front element was totalled, it had a mass of fine scratches all over the center-front, making for very poor, cloudy results.
To avoid looking for a replacement front element, I tried polishing. Polishing it led to a somewhat brighter but quite poor results with poor resolution. Too much polishing can lead to uneven distortion, etc. _________________ I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7776 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
vivaldibow wrote: |
Thanks. I think polishing and probably recoating is the ultimate cure; but this work is too delicate without the right machinery. Have you ever done this? How to control the thickness to be polished and also keep the curvature of the lens? I am thinking of making a reverse mold first. |
I have a lens with badly hazed coating on one side of an inner element, and this is exactly the process I am planning to take.
I've got the cerium oxide, and I'm going to try and make a a reverse mould from 'Sugru' - a mouldable silicone. This should be soft enough to not damage the glass and firm enough to maintin the shape. But as yet, I haven't had time to try it.
https://sugru.com/
.. _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 835
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
Lloydy wrote: |
vivaldibow wrote: |
Thanks. I think polishing and probably recoating is the ultimate cure; but this work is too delicate without the right machinery. Have you ever done this? How to control the thickness to be polished and also keep the curvature of the lens? I am thinking of making a reverse mold first. |
I have a lens with badly hazed coating on one side of an inner element, and this is exactly the process I am planning to take.
I've got the cerium oxide, and I'm going to try and make a a reverse mould from 'Sugru' - a mouldable silicone. This should be soft enough to not damage the glass and firm enough to maintin the shape. But as yet, I haven't had time to try it.
https://sugru.com/
.. |
Glad to hear you had the same idea! Thanks for the link. Very interesting and useful stuff. That's still a meticulous job and I am not sure if I am confident enough not to screw up the glass. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
After a quick Google of "lens polishing recoating"
https://www.ducloslenses.com/pages/glass-polishing-recoating
http://www.kantocamera.com/english/repair/repair.html
This one probably will be expensive http://www.ultraflat.com
It appears http://www.focalpointlens.com is now closed for good. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 835
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
Thanks. These service is available. One of them is in Japan. Good the first one is in US. I am gonna give them a call. Will find out! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 835
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 4:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
As I am waiting for the OM-NEX adapter, I mounted an MD-NEX adapter to my Sony a3000, then manually placed the lens onto the MD-NEX adapter. Took a test shot of a paper bag by moving the camera to focus. It seem the lens is pretty sharp. The photo is a 100% crop and although it is slight OOF, the lens resolves the "Ruffles" on the paper bag. I've taken the shots of the same scene using different Soligor/Vivitar lenses. Besides Vivitar 90mm f/2.5, not too many of them show this much of details. Certainly I can tell the contrast is not great. Not sure if it is because of the f2 aperture or more due to the haze, or there is some light leakage between the lens and the adapter.
#1
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gardener
Joined: 22 Sep 2013 Posts: 950 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gardener wrote:
The real effects of damage are often overblown. I've seen numerous lenses that by all accounts should have headed straight to the trash bin, but still produced great shots. Over the past year I had exactly one case where I was like "Wow, that's bad, did not see this coming". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 835
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
Gardener wrote: |
The real effects of damage are often overblown. I've seen numerous lenses that by all accounts should have headed straight to the trash bin, but still produced great shots. Over the past year I had exactly one case where I was like "Wow, that's bad, did not see this coming". |
You are absolutely right. I am waiting for the OM-Nex adapter to have some more test shots. Lost of contrast due to haze could be most significant. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16497 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
vivaldibow wrote: |
Gardener wrote: |
The real effects of damage are often overblown. I've seen numerous lenses that by all accounts should have headed straight to the trash bin, but still produced great shots. Over the past year I had exactly one case where I was like "Wow, that's bad, did not see this coming". |
You are absolutely right. I am waiting for the OM-Nex adapter to have some more test shots. Lost of contrast due to haze could be most significant. |
... and that's easy to correct in PP! _________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 835
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
kds315* wrote: |
vivaldibow wrote: |
Gardener wrote: |
The real effects of damage are often overblown. I've seen numerous lenses that by all accounts should have headed straight to the trash bin, but still produced great shots. Over the past year I had exactly one case where I was like "Wow, that's bad, did not see this coming". |
You are absolutely right. I am waiting for the OM-Nex adapter to have some more test shots. Lost of contrast due to haze could be most significant. |
... and that's easy to correct in PP! |
After I tried the lens with the OM-NEX adapter, I decided to return it. Wide open the contrast is fairly low and this results in details washed out and focusing slightly difficult. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|