Recoating Summicron "cleaning marks"

Nokton48

Nokton48

Veteran
Local time
12:32 PM
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
7,038
I received an old 5cm Summicron V2 lens, and although I'm happy with overall build quality, etc. the front element has alot of fine circular cleaning marks.

I have spoken to John at Focal Point yesterday and today, and since I probably want to keep the lens, I'm seriously considering having John recoat it. His total fee would be $250, which includes a CLA, being 50 years old, the lens no doubt needs it. He says 50% of Summicrons out there have these marks, it's quite common. The 60's technology coatings were applied at too low a temperature, so they are way too soft. Gently rubbing the front with a cloth will scratch the lens! I also emailed Sherry Krauter, and Xouxin, waiting for their responses.

Anything here I am missing? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
First thing I would do is tect the lens without shade under various lighting conditions - including extremes that should prodice flare. See what happens. It usually takes a lot of damage (read major scratches) to make a difference.
Costs you only a roll of film and then you'll know.
As for cleaning it - be gentle - I have a late 50's Summicron DR - no cleaning marks prior to me buying and none since.
Hope this helps
David
PS I've had lens work done by John and he's great
 
Why recoat the front surface?

Antireflective coating works by reflecting light off its surface, in the same amount and out of phase with with that reflected off its adjacent glass surface thereby cancelling the glass reflection.

It would make a difference off the surface closest to the emulsion and all internal surfaces. Those reflections would lead to flare. Reflections off the front surface go outside the lens, back to the subject and do not contribute to flare!

link
 
Sherry Krauter has responded via email, that cleaning marks do not effect results, unless they are really severe. Yesterday the Summicron traveled with me, and I'm doing a test roll of Fuji Presto 400 in my M2.

Why redo the coating? I guess because it bothers me, to see it looking like that. Youxin has now emailed and says that polishing and recoating can make the lens look nice, but then it becomes not as good a lens, the optical curvature can be changed.

Still, I'm still thinking of sending it off. John says he does three or four scratched Summicrons a month, and it's not at all unusual to have cleaning marks. I'm OK with all this (including the price) as long as all he removes -is- the coating. And it really sounds like he knows what he is doing. BTW I have wanted a Summicron, I had a DR twenty years ago, and I really enjoyed it's -resolution- and overall "look" especially with B&W films.

Thanks Guys for your responses! -Dan
 
lmd91343 said:
Why recoat the front surface?

Antireflective coating works by reflecting light off its surface, in the same amount and out of phase with with that reflected off its adjacent glass surface thereby cancelling the glass reflection.
Click to expand...

that's not exactly true. It all happens within the same surface.
But you're right, the front surface is the least important, unless you use a filter, or there are deep scratches.

EDIT: ok, sorry i think i misread you and thought you mean the other side of the lens, by "adjacent glass surface".
 
Last edited:
Rick Oleson also makes small mistakes in his description (although the stuff relevant for photographers is more or less correct).
E.g. "No…. actually, they’ll have a slight yellow-green tint – the extra light that didn’t get reflected passes on through to the film, " -this is wrong, the reflections being cancelled by the anti-reflection coatings are NOT passing through to the film, they are cancelled at the surface, i.e. absorbed (lens is heating my some milli-degrees, i guess).
 
Last edited:
Cleaning Marks

Cleaning Marks

I agree with the consensus that having the front re-coated is a waste of money. I've owned a lot of Summicrons (and other lenses) that have terrible coating marks and have never seen any difference in the the final results. Note there is a big difference between coating marks due to cleaning and real scratches, however even minor scratches on the front element rarely is detrimental.

If the marks really bother you then buy a different lens and sell this one. Probably cheaper.

BTW why do you thing the lens need cleaning? Is it hard to focus? Lot's of dirt inside? Binding?
 
If he has a certain mentality, he won't be able to use the lens if it doesn't look "perfect", even though it takes sharp photos and its mechanically sound.

It's tied to his self-image, and a "marred" lens will bother him every time he looks at the lens.

$250 is cheap voodoo for him to be able to use the lens without "bruciore di stomaco."
 
It should give results close to perfect in its present condition; wanting it to look perfect is another matter.
 
It's a lens! It has no feelings. If it takes acceptable photographs for you, then use it as is. ANY time you dissasemble a mechanical item and reassemble you run the risk of introducing other complications not to mention recoating a lens surface. -Dick
 
I would advise against it. Scratches on the front element aren't a real problem, unless it looks like someone tried to clean it with a Brillo pad. Scratches and nicks on the rear elements are a far more serious problem.

If you have the front element repolished you will change the character of the lens.

What will improve performance greatly and help suppress flare is getting the lens cleaned and the haze removed. Leica overhauled my Summicron 2/50 DR and once the haze was removed it's performance was greatly improved and I never again had problems shooting in to bright lights.
 
That's really too bad about Arax, they did an amazing job on a really badly-scuffed and hazy front element from a 1950's Summicron I had. It came back in absolutely mint shape.
 
The seller has agreed to reduce the price due to the cleaning marks (he wasn't aware of them) and I'm happy with the adjustment. John is getting a couple of my LF lenses to clean thru and thru (A Convertible 300mm Schneider Symmar and 100mm Convertible Symmar) so I thought I'd add the Summicron to save shipping. But it seems there's a good chance when I develop the film the lens will be fine, and I'll be AOK with that. The lens barrel is not mint, nor is my M2, I prefer user grade, since I don't baby my equipment. It's not worth the chance of changing the optical character of the lens, which is why I bought it in the first place. But it should probably be cleaned inside, although it's working very smoothly and I'm pleased about that. When I send my 90mm Summicron for an overhaul to Sherry Krauter (I think the helical needs a clean), I think I'll send the 5cm Summicron along, and see what she thinks about a cleaning inside. John thinks there is most likely a bit of haze inside, if it's never been serviced. Can't really tell. The two Schneiders will go to John as planned. Thanks again, everybody!
 
Last edited:
it looks interesting. It would be cool if you should take pics with the lens in original condition when haze is cleaned inside then take same pics again with overhauled lens (front coating) then it would be interesting to see if there are any differences. with B&W and colors.

Repaired old Elmar 50mm 2.8 is on way to me. This lens had severe haze before (it is imposible to get any shoots, everything was only fogged in pictures). I just thought that it would be interesting to compare shoots to uncleaned same lens with untouched coating. He who CLA'd my lens, said that front coating is very bad damaged (deep scratches). I still will test this and see if it can give romantic look :D
 
Sherry and Youxin told you right. Let it be what it is. When you see your pictures, I think you'll agree: it's not a problem unless the damage is severe.
 
I recently had Focal Point recoat my early scalloped-ring DR-Summicron (sn #1512xxx range) that had a coating so bad it almost looked frosted in places. I think a previous owner must have dropped it in the sand. I got it cheap back around '78 for about $150, including "eyes".

It was quite SHARP, but seemed to flare worse than my J-8 lens, although I did not do any formal tests. The J-8 also focused quicker and was lighter, and I used it more, until switching over to the great C/V 35mm f2.5.

But the old DR-Summicron with the crusty-cake-looking coating damage bugged me, so I sent it recently to Focal Point, who repolished/recoated the front element and cleaned the slight internal haze for $270. Took three weeks, and the lens looks 98% better, with only a few slight marks on the front element. (I've not used it yet.. will soon.) Perhaps it will not make much difference but I feel BETTER about my lens, now that it's prettier. ;-)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom