New lens scratch

[lawnpotter]

I just recieved a new voight lander lens and I found the tiniest hairline scratch on the bottom element off the center. The scatch is inside the lens not on the outside. The scratch is so tiny that it takes a couple of minutes of turning and angleing it in the light to find it. Well my question is obvious. Should I send it back? It will cost me $40.00 or more and its a hassle . I hope voightlander pays for the courier. Are tiny imperfections common on new lenses? My other concern is the guys at the store wont be able to find it. It is there but you have to work hard to find it. Thanks

 

[peterm1]

I would most likely return it unless I were satisfied that I was just being obsessive. (SOmetimes after a day or so a defect does not seem so terrible.) But in principle, these things are expensive enough. You should not bear the cost (reduced resale price etc) if its not perfect- which is presumably why you bought a new one.

 

[lawnpotter]

Thanks both. I will return it. I do feel photography makes me a bit obsessive and I dont like that but new is new and the scratch is there. it is so tiny almost impossible to see, but it is there. If I paid a used price for it I may not worry about it.

 

[bmattock]

Thanks both. I will return it. I do feel photography makes me a bit obsessive and I dont like that but new is new and the scratch is there. it is so tiny almost impossible to see, but it is there. If I paid a used price for it I may not worry about it.

You're actually doing them a favor. If QC let that get by, they will want to know so they can fix it.

I know too many obsessive lens peepers who have microscopic vision and a disdain for anything that does not meet their impossible standards, but in your case a) new lens, and b) you can see it with your bare eyes, even if you do have to hunt for it. So yes, I'd return it. That seems quite reasonable.

 

[lawnpotter]

Thanks bmattock, I just did another post relating to this, you can read it if you like, basically the dealer very politely said he will return it but he thinks tiny imperfections are normal and I am overreacting (my summation and words) I am just wondering if he is correct that a perfect lens is a rare thing? If I return it I will have to mail it and I get the feeling that he would not sell me another lens cause he is going to loose shipping cost over this transaction and he probanly wont risk me again.

 

[bmattock]

Thanks bmattock, I just did another post relating to this, you can read it if you like, basically the dealer very politely said he will return it but he thinks tiny imperfections are normal and I am overreacting (my summation and words) I am just wondering if he is correct that a perfect lens is a rare thing? If I return it I will have to mail it and I get the feeling that he would not sell me another lens cause he is going to loose shipping cost over this transaction and he probanly wont risk me again.

Well, I can't read the feelings of another, but I suppose he is not happy. And he probably will incur some loss, in postage and time if nothing else. However, he is in business selling items that attract people who tend towards perfectionism, so I wonder how he can not expect this sort of thing from time to time.

I don't buy lenses new, can't afford them. So I have no idea what the standard for a brand-new high-end lens might be. I know that a scratch such as you describe would not bother me too much if I found it on a used lens, but I have different standards for judging a $5 lens, if you know what I mean. I'm happy if it is basically clear.

Do I think you are picking nits? I would not venture a guess. I know that in my experience, lenses with very minor (and sometimes major) defects work just fine and I cannot tell the difference between them an a 'perfect' lens of the same type. I've even seen a lens on PN that was mud-caked and rendered wonderfully sharp, clear, excellent photos. I think the whole princess in the pea thing is a bit overblown - but that's ME, not YOU. If I drove a Mercedes that cost more than my house, I'd want ever stitch on the leather seats to be perfectly sewn by German gnomes. But I don't, so minor imperfections on my Kia were no big deal to me.

 

[lawnpotter]

Thanks Bmattock, The lens cost me $350.00 and that includes delivery and taxes, so for me, its a lot of money but for a new lens its not a lot. I just came back from a camera store and it took 10 minutes but the guy finally found the inner scratch., He was amazed I found it. He said that he was almost 100% sure it will not effect IQ but he would probabvly return it out of principal and cosmetics. However When I told him I would loose about $150.00 after I bought a new one localy he said he would keep it. I will run a roll of film through it before I decide. Next time I will buy locally even if it cost me $150.00 more. By the way, if this was a cheaper used lens, my expectations would be less. Thanks for your input

 

[bmattock]

Thanks Bmattock, The lens cost me $350.00 and that includes delivery and taxes, so for me, its a lot of money but for a new lens its not a lot. I just came back from a camera store and it took 10 minutes but the guy finally found the inner scratch., He was amazed I found it. He said that he was almost 100% sure it will not effect IQ but he would probabvly return it out of principal and cosmetics. However When I told him I would loose about $150.00 after I bought a new one localy he said he would keep it. I will run a roll of film through it before I decide. Next time I will buy locally even if it cost me $150.00 more. By the way, if this was a cheaper used lens, my expectations would be less. Thanks for your input

I understand, I wasn't trying to make you feel badly. Like I said, with a high end purchase (and that's a lot of money to me), I'd expect better quality.

I do believe you won't see any problems with the photos, but it all depends on the person. Good luck to you!

 

[bmattock]

" The scratch is so tiny that it takes a couple of minutes of turning and angleing it in the light to find it."

I get a new lens, I hold it up to the light and glance through it. If I don't see anything wrong with that, I don't worry about it. I've never actually looked for anything that tiny in a lens. But I would certainly return if it destroys your confidence in the lens.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I know some people who just cannot sleep at night knowing that the scratch is there. It just 'bugs' them until they feel they 'must' do something about it. I don't know if there is a word for that (except insulting ones). Personally, I expect scratches on cheap lenses, but that's my life and welcome to it.

 

[lawnpotter]

bmattock, I didnt feel you were tying to make feel badly. I was agreeing with you on how its all relative. I bought a truck for $800.00 and for 6 years it made me thousands of dollars for my business. From the day I bought it, It looked ready for the scrap yard. But for me it was the most beautiful vehicle on the road. As far as the lens goes, I am tempted to live with it but then again I cant help thinking that I have a responsibility to other lens purchasers to hold the company responsible for making good quality. If I wanted a scratch then I would have bought used. Also the local camera guy didnt think I was crazy, he probably would have returned it.

 

[Luddite Frank]

I would not consider a scratch to be an "acceptable manufacturing defect".

The 1955 edition of Morgan & Lester's "Leica Manual", in the section on Lenses, they go on quite a bit about some lenses having tiny bubbles (air inclusions), and how this was considered "allowable" by Leitz and other mfrs... they go into some granular discussion about the size of these bubbles , relative to the size of the element, etc... and explain how they should have no discernable effect on the image.

(I recently picked-up an 85 mm Zeiss Opton Sonnar (Contax RF) for a friend. The lens is in excellent cosmetic condition, and the glass is free from scratches & cleaning-marks; but I was quite surprised at the presence of several tiny bubbles in the lens elements; even from the almighty house of Zeiss. my friend was thrilled with the lens, and when I pointed -out the bubbles, he acknowledged them, but wasn't too worried about them. The lens takes fine pictures.)

Bubbles in glass are most definitely a manufacturing abberation; a scratch is the result of careless handling, on somebody's part, whether in the factory, or somewhere along the way.

If the dealer values his customers, he should not have a problem taking the lens back, then insisting that the lens manufacturer make things right with him.

At least, that's my philosophical point of view....

I don't buy new lenses because I feel that I can't afford them; and if I did spring for a new lens, it would be because I'm weary of trying to find thread-mount Leica lenses that aren't scratched and foggy, so that new lens had better be in perfect condition. ( and I'd prefer it not have bubbles ! )

Good luck !

Luddite Frank

 

[M. Valdemar]

Good Lord, you're the type of buyer that gives eBay sellers agida.

Once in a while one will get a buyer who examines the item with an electron microscope and sends you a panic letter listing two dozen invisible "flaws".

I just tell them to send it back, usually they're angling for a "partial refund" or they are so crazy there's no possible way to deal with them rationally or satisfy them.

(I realize you bought it new, but heebus jeebus)

Thanks Bmattock, The lens cost me $350.00 and that includes delivery and taxes, so for me, its a lot of money but for a new lens its not a lot. I just came back from a camera store and it took 10 minutes but the guy finally found the inner scratch., He was amazed I found it. He said that he was almost 100% sure it will not effect IQ but he would probabvly return it out of principal and cosmetics. However When I told him I would loose about $150.00 after I bought a new one localy he said he would keep it. I will run a roll of film through it before I decide. Next time I will buy locally even if it cost me $150.00 more. By the way, if this was a cheaper used lens, my expectations would be less. Thanks for your input

 

[lawnpotter]

Thanks for all the replies. M. Valdemar, just to clarify , I did not buy this lens used on Ebay, I bought it new and I did not inspect the lens with a magnifying glass. Also, a month ago I bought a used Leica by mail. The meter doesnt work and I new this before I bought it, also there is a few bumps and bangs on it . I love this camera. It is not in mint condition but it is exactly what I expected and what I paid for. I posted this thread cause I really am an amateur and I wanted to know what I should expect from a new lens. I learned from this thread that some people expect perfection in a new lens while others dont. I think luddite frank makes some good points regarding custumer service and quality control. While on the learning curb, it helps to get other peoples point of view and experience. I apreciate your help.