For "scratch free" lens lovers

[Attila]

http://www.certo6.com/gallery/planar.html

[Orio]

Well, I can see the bug shadow in the picture But surely it does not look as bad as the lens
In any case I would not buy a lens in this condition.
What is the black thread, I wonder? A crack in an inner glass?

[Attila]

I guess inner element is cracked. I have a cracked 85mm f1.8 PK Pentax SMC, I bought for 15 EUR beautiful portrait lens.

[maddog10]

I think it is where someone opened the lens and when rebuilding it got a piece of debris, like when you cross thread something and it cuts out new material. Bug probably got in when the lens was open

[Abbazz]

Usually, few large scratches or big cracks are far less annoying than many small scratches or so called "cleaning marks." The latter tend to reduce contrast and induce flare and there is nothing to do about it, except to have the damaged lens repolished, which is quite expensive and always damageable to the lens, as its thickness is modified. Usually large scratches don't affect much the picture and it is quite easy to fill the defects with mate black paint to make them invisible. Yes, this is the way you deal with large scratches on a lens: you just paint them back. The black paint is totally invisible to the eye (if there is a large area painted, it may affect a little bit the out of focus patterns and the aperture of the lens) and yet masks totally the glass defects.

These defects are also far more annoying when they occur at the rear element than at the front element. The closer from the film, the more visible the defect. Usually, a few deep scratches on the front element are not so bad. But a scratch on the rear element or an almost invisible web of tiny "cleaning marks" on the front element can make a lens unusable.

Cheers!

Abbazz

[estudleon]

It seem to me that the crack is in the front group, that is better that if was at the rear group and the bad plus is at the rear element.

the people say that with your own crack lens, the pics are very good. I know a photographer that tell me : "I have a 180/2,8 Nikon with cleaning marks and is one of the shapest lens that I have".

Some puts the lens in the bag with the rear element up with cap, and with the front element down without any cap.

I do not this. Im very carefull with my lenses, may be because I have a collector soul more than a photographer.

Regards, Rino.

[Attila]

I bought "pro" lenses they are incredible scratched, "cleaning marked" I think a reporter used them without caps and store in bags with other gears. They takes wonderful sharp pictures. (Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AIS) Nikkor 24mm f2 AIS.

I have also cleaning marked Biotar with lot of cleaning marks on surface , exactly as Abbaz described , unusable.

[estudleon]

Well. When I bought my first 20/4 (the best that I have), as in my country didn't be other copy in the shops, I did the operation.

It has a front element with lot of cleaning marks, I said a lot and it is.

At F/8, 11 and 16, the center is excelent, and the corners so so (at F/16 the corner is good).

I not use the lens with color film yet. I think that may be better than with B&W, because somebody tells me that the color rendition of the Flekt is one of his better things. I will see.

Regards, Rino.

[Abbazz]

Here's another link to a page featuring sharp pictures taken with a filthy lens:

http://www.deansphotographica.com/deans_of_idaho/old_stuff_pages/dirtylenstest/dirtylenstest.html

Cheers!

Abbazz

[yalcinaydin]

My Rokkor-X PG 50/1.4 has marks on the front screen like cleaning marks but I can't see any effects of it on reversed lens macro usage.
Here is the lens and the photo: