Can this be fixed (Reasonably) ?

[srtiwari]

Bought a Summaron 35/2.8 , but the seller neglected to note this little flaw 🙄
He has agreed to take it back, or reduce price by $150.
This little mark seems just under the surface of the rear element, does not respond to gentle wiping, and with a loop looks like like a tiny (about 1mm diameter) "etching".
It is difficult to describe, but looks like the outline of a swollen glove, and has a pin-point center dot. It is completely transparent at some angles, and a little like ground-glass in others.It does not look like haze, or fungus. I don't know if it is a bubble or crack, but it was a Devil to photograph adequately.

So, my questions are-

1. What is it - Glass defect, scratch, fungus etc. ?
2. Does it matter ? Casual review of some pictures does not show any obvious problem. But, I also don't know what to look for, or where.
3. Can it be fixed, and by whom and for how much -approximately ?
4. What would you do ? Return, fix, or Ignore and take the $150 and use as is.

I look forward to some direction, from people who may know what this is.

 

[benmacphoto]

Looks like blooming from lens separation.
I'd take some photos to see if it has an affect.
I personally love my 2.8 Summaron and depending on the price you paid,
if there is no negative affect I'd keep it and get that $150 refund.

 

[swoop]

First see how it works. A blemish on the glass isn't a dealbreaker and often not at all detectable on film. If it works fine, take the refund. If you can be without it for 2-3 months send it out to a repair place to have it looked that. They'll give you an estimate if it's workable, if so have it fixed, and if it isn't possible or worth it then you're just out shipping. You still have a fine lens with a mole on it.

 

[ferider]

The Summaron has a single element in the back, so it cann't be separation. I'm guessing somebody smacked the lens somehow.

Since it's the rear element, return the lens. The defect is big enough that you will see it on your photos.

Roland.

 

[srtiwari]

Thanks, Roland. I plan to do just that !

 

[Vickko]

Yeah, the folklore is "front surface defects, no big deal. Rear surface defects, big deal, they will degrade the image."

If the seller is willing to refund you, I'd return it.

Vick

 

[Steve M.]

I agree, from the pic it looks like impact damage. But I'd fill it in w/ a magic marker and shoot a roll. My guess is that the photos would be fine.

 

[farlymac]

Impact damage. Needs to be replaced. I've got a camera with seperation artifacts in between the two front elements caused by the shock from a drop, but unless it is pointed into the sun, it's difficult to tell they are there. On the other hand, like ferider and Vicco say, the rear element is critical for the projection of the image onto the film. A fault closer to the front tends to get blended out as it goes along the beam line, but if it is at the rear of the lens, there is nothing to hide the fault. If the seller has other units, see if he will do a swap, so you don't have to go looking again.

PF