deirdre
Well-known
I have a 1952 5cm Summitar with light haze. Here's a picture SOOC taken with it under conditions that show its reduced contrast. Here's a picture I took with it, then adjusted the levels, and it's accurate, color and clarity wise.
Any shooting into brighter light will tend to make things worse for that lens, but it's fine in shadow or under select lighting conditions if you don't mind doing the post.
Eventually, it'll get gussied up, but for now it's the way it is.
Any shooting into brighter light will tend to make things worse for that lens, but it's fine in shadow or under select lighting conditions if you don't mind doing the post.
Eventually, it'll get gussied up, but for now it's the way it is.
gb hill
Veteran
About all my lenese have cleaning marks. A few with scratches. One with haze. The one with haze is a spiratone 400/8 slr lens. The haze is in the rear element & I've uncrewed the lens & tryed cleaning both sides of the glass to no avail. I'm begining to think the rear element is 2 pieces of glass & the haze is sandwitched between the two pieces of glass. Don't know how to clean it.
DNG
Film Friendly
ozarque
Member
Many of my lenses have dust, scratches, cleaning ,marks, haze and even fungus. I shoot them anyway and try not to think about it.
I have a Vivitar 200 f3 which has a lot of fungus growing on several internal elements. It looks terrible, but I can't tell from the pictures it takes.
The scratchy Summar does great unless pointed at bright direct lights.
I have a Vivitar 200 f3 which has a lot of fungus growing on several internal elements. It looks terrible, but I can't tell from the pictures it takes.
The scratchy Summar does great unless pointed at bright direct lights.
k.a
Well-known
guess you bought it at schönherrsphoto? was very close to buying that lens a few weeks back, but tried it on my M8 but didn't really find it to my likening. the lens is small and light, but it is low contrast and not as sharp as my 28mm asph, but at 1750kr it's a bargain! hope you enjoy it!
My leica lenses are i good shape, but i do got som russians with a lot of defekts (fungus etc). I find that fungus isn't a dealbreaker really. as long as the lens is resonably sharp it's good enough to use
brokencivilian
Established
Could you not just remove the front element and remove it?
or get a cla if you don't want to do it yourself?
Brian Legge
Veteran
I have a Summarit 50mm 1.5, scratched, hazy, engraved, it has it all.
I did get a few shots I really like out of it:
I was holding on to it as a lens for types where a soft, glowing look works for the subject and image. It works REALLY well for some subjects.
Unfortunately, I don't tend to shoot those subjects often enough to justify even one lens dedicated to it. I've been reluctant to buy anything with scratches or haze since that realization.
I did get a few shots I really like out of it:
I was holding on to it as a lens for types where a soft, glowing look works for the subject and image. It works REALLY well for some subjects.
Unfortunately, I don't tend to shoot those subjects often enough to justify even one lens dedicated to it. I've been reluctant to buy anything with scratches or haze since that realization.
NaChase
Well-known
39per1
Established
My Nikkor 35 F2 AIS has fungus inside but works this way:
A040 Senigallia Barca di Davide _non so cos'è l'AccaDiErre, su Flickr
A108 Ancona Duomo di Davide _non so cos'è l'AccaDiErre, su Flickr
I'll continue in use it......
A040 Senigallia Barca di Davide _non so cos'è l'AccaDiErre, su Flickr
A108 Ancona Duomo di Davide _non so cos'è l'AccaDiErre, su Flickr
I'll continue in use it......
Mablo
Well-known
I have a Canon LTM 50mm/1.8 with some wild looking schneideritis (white dots) behind the front lens. No effect on image quality though.
tomalophicon
Well-known
Check out this thread. The lens is kinda marked, but still shoots acceptably.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=78528&highlight=jim+galli
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=78528&highlight=jim+galli
Phantomas
Well-known
Shoot with cleaning marks and scratches, but since that option is not available I answered "Mint!".
Turtle
Veteran
My lenses are mostly clean, but where there are minor marks, or abrasions, I dont worry. one of my enlarging lenses has lots of fine cleaning marks but performs well. My best 50mm enlarging lens has a small chip right in the middle.
People worry more than they should and miss out on some good bargains because of largely cosmetic blemishes.
People worry more than they should and miss out on some good bargains because of largely cosmetic blemishes.
reagan
hey, they're only Zorkis
Yep, I have a rather substantial nick in this Summar, but I don't hesitate to mount it up and go shooting. My others I'm sure all have cleaning marks, scratches and other imperfections. Not that big of a deal to me.
elmer3.5
Well-known
Hi, i always take great care about lenses, in the past shot with not so good ones and early decided to go for mint ones even if i have to pay a lot more for them.
The fact is haze, scratches and cleaning marks waste many pictures.
If you add lens designs that suffer from flare or are uncoated then you can´t really shoot many things.
For instance i purchased a Foca camera that can´t use beacuse the seller 3000 kms away didn´t tell me it had heavy cleaning marks, to him this was a minimum concern!
Bye!
The fact is haze, scratches and cleaning marks waste many pictures.
If you add lens designs that suffer from flare or are uncoated then you can´t really shoot many things.
For instance i purchased a Foca camera that can´t use beacuse the seller 3000 kms away didn´t tell me it had heavy cleaning marks, to him this was a minimum concern!
Bye!
nobbylon
Veteran
I only buy lenses that have mint glass, clean them once and then fit a filter. I'm not at all bothered by barrel cosmetics but the glass has to be mint. This is so that I have less trouble selling them on after I have tried them.
Cleaning marks wouldn't happen if people stopped over cleaning.
I had a zuiko 50 1.8 that was infested with spider web fungus and it was still as sharp as a mint copy I had. I think the main influence on image quality is haze. Fine scratches don't seem to matter. It's only when the surface shape is physically changed by polishing or chipping that I've noticed a difference.
Spots in lenses are noticeable when stopped down. I did some experiments with a marker pen on a filter a few years ago to find out.
Cleaning marks wouldn't happen if people stopped over cleaning.
I had a zuiko 50 1.8 that was infested with spider web fungus and it was still as sharp as a mint copy I had. I think the main influence on image quality is haze. Fine scratches don't seem to matter. It's only when the surface shape is physically changed by polishing or chipping that I've noticed a difference.
Spots in lenses are noticeable when stopped down. I did some experiments with a marker pen on a filter a few years ago to find out.
nobbylon
Veteran
This was shot with a 60's collapsible Elmar 50mm 2.8
Shot at 2.8
The rear of the front element had suffered from etching caused by oil vapour from the aperture blades and had been polished using toothpaste.
I really liked the results.
nobbylon
Veteran
Same lens at 5.6
TheGodParticle
Well-known
@nobbylon - i love the dreamy look!
joeswe
Well-known
Well, I suspect, that after having cleaned some fungus off the front element of his precious Summicron-M 50 with great success, the owner of this lens will be much less picky about imperfections in his lenses in the future 
For those of you who don't speak/read German, you're invited to have your guesses at what "old and proven household remedy for lens fungus removal" had such a decisive effect in removing the fungus...
:bang:
For those of you who don't speak/read German, you're invited to have your guesses at what "old and proven household remedy for lens fungus removal" had such a decisive effect in removing the fungus...
:bang: