Well used or mint?

bychance · Joined: 24 Apr 2013 Posts: 347 Location: Kent, England

Is a well worn/used lens something to avoid or something to look for if you are buying a lens to use rather than collect. I can't help thinking that some 'mint' lenses are in their condition because they were unloved and pased over for something better.
I also wonder if a well worn lens was probably a great example and because of the worn state its in, is a good cheap buy.

I am looking at an old 105mm f2.8 lens at the moment that is a bit tatty and well used, dead cheap, for some reason I fancy it more that another that is near mint.
Almost like the wear & tear is like a thumbs up sign
Confused

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Well, I have had quite a few mint lenses that were stinkers and I have and use several well worn but optically superb lenses, so I think there is a lot of mileage in the theory that mint lenses are so because they were never much good.

bychance · Joined: 24 Apr 2013 Posts: 347 Location: Kent, England

Emm, exactly...

I think I might buy this old well worn stalwart and give it a bit of tlc, someone must have loved it.

Lets hope they didn't drop it Smile

eddieitman · Joined: 12 Apr 2011 Posts: 1246 Location: United Kingdom

Agree some of my best lenses have been battered and well used, there is a reason they where used so extensivly.
I have some lenses that tbh will not see the light of day as they are mint, but perform terrible.

It all depends on the condition is it a good lens that has paint wear or has it been dropped, etc

barryreid · Expire: 2015-11-04

I think my Tamron 24-48 fitted the well used 'cause it's good theory. For that reason, I think clean optics are more important than perfect paintwork for the photographer rather than the collector!

themoleman342 · Expire: 2013-01-24

I don't think a new or mint rating means it is bad. I've had quite a few vintage mint lenses that were superb. Actually, pretty much all of them. I think people always bought accessory lenses with the best of intentions (using them a lot) but they get onto a camera only once in a while. People lose interest and things go into storage. It's the way of many hobbies.

A very worn Mir 10 28mm that I had had a de-centered element. Definitely a defect from the factory. Someone obviously loved the thing but didn't notice or care about the fall off in sharpness on one side. I've encountered a few Mir 26 45mms in the same condition.

It may be an OK generalization but personally I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

norland · Joined: 10 Aug 2013 Posts: 165

Some lenses that look really pristine do indeed turn out to be duds, whether through fault, fungus and haze or just bad design in the first place; whereas if indications of use are wear to the paint rather than worn-out mechanicals (or signs of careless handling) then no worry.
I've a Soligor 180mm pre-set with noticeably eroded external paint
-- guess a previous owner must have liked it as much as I do now.

barryreid · Expire: 2015-11-04

Another thought on this I have a really nice Tamron 17mm which came boxed and complete with case... and some significant fungus. I've also had the same with a few other Tamron and Yashica lenses.

It's got to the point where i reckon it's best to avoid cased vintage lenses on the auction site, unless they have decent photographs or a detailed description with regard to fungus on the elements.

bychance · Joined: 24 Apr 2013 Posts: 347 Location: Kent, England

I agree with that, storing them in a case unless with a silica gel tab, seems to be giving fungus an ideal enviroment.

I missed that lens (visiting my new grandoughter) But will now be looking out for lenses that look like thay earned their battle scars and hopefully save a few bob Smile

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

A significant exception to this very likely scenario is the lens (and camera) that the user always keeps inside an everready case. Personally I can't stand the things, but I've bought many cameras with lenses that were kept in them and I love to buy these because they're almost always in very clean condition. Lenses I've acquired this way are always very clean, and so far, are excellent performers, as well. True, almost all of them have been 50mm's so far, but that's not so bad. A Canon 50mm f/1.4 SSC or SMC Tak 50/1.4 goes for a pretty good chunk of change on eBay these days. With the funds from those, I can buy well-used but not abused lenses I can use.

asterinex · Joined: 04 Nov 2012 Posts: 311

It is aways best to test the lens. I have lenses which look like they survived a war that are optically awesome.
I also have Mint-lenses that are awesome.
Check it out. Look at it. Aperture working ? Smooth focusring ? Oil ? Scratches ? And test it.
The advantage of well worn out lens is that you don't have to be too careful when using it Smile

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

I generally buy tidy looking lenses, and mostly I'm lucky in that they are usually good optically, they might be a crap lens by design - but most of mine seem to be as they were intended.
I don't mind a well used lens though, if it's a lens I want some wear and tear is fine. And I do kinda agree with the thinking that a well used lens should be good, which is why I didn't hesitate to buy a very worn but optically spotless Tamron 500 mirror lens from a charity shop recently. I thought that someone must have used it daily because it was a great lens. It might well have been, but it wasn't when I got it. Perhaps someone at the charity shop dropped it ? Thankfully I got a refund with no questions.