Tiny nick / scratch on rear element of 35mm 1.4 Asph...

[KM-25]

I have just got back on the wagon of having a 35mm 1.4 Asph and took delivery of what I thought was going to be a *really* clean one this evening ( it is ). At first, the thing looked fabulously mint. Then I saw a mark on the rear and looked at it under a 20X loupe and saw what is at most a 1mm scratch in the center 1/3rd of the glass. I then took some really close photos and it revealed that about .3mm is kind of deep, like it blew a little bulbous chunk of glass out although that might amount to 1/10th of a mm. I shot a couple of tests shots along with the usual focus shift test and everything looked fine. I'll likely shoot some more outdoors tomorrow to throw some more light at it.

So I paid a decent price for it, $2,700, the seller is *super* apologetic about it, has already given me a full refund to my paypal and is also offering to discount it to $2,200 if I decide to live with the flaw.

I plan on using this lens for years if not decades so I will be doing my own cosmetic wear, but scratched or damaged glass is a deferent animal entirely and is a shame on an otherwise flawless optic. But the bottom line...if it is not really going to affect the image quality then I think I will live with it since I don't plan on selling it but using it for the rest of my career.

I'm usually pretty knowledgeable about this kind of thing but I am still looking for an opinion or two...could a tiny nick like this affect image quality in any way and if so, is it even worth being concerned over?

 

[Huss]

Shoot it stopped down with the sun in the image. The way one would to get intentional flare/sun bursts. Shoot it into heavily back lit scenes (think high key portraiture).
It needs to be stopped down to show any ill effects.
If it is fine taking those type of images, and you are happy with the discounted price, then you are good.

The only issue I have is looking at that crack next to the chip. And wondering if that would spread...

 

[splitimageview]

It won't cause any issue at all, it only lowers the value.

 

[Tom A]

It is on the rear element - and that is critical. You can get some serious reflections and "burns" from it. Front element scratches is not as critical - rear element damage is a deal breaker for me! As stated, the small "crack" is also worrying - the lens must have suffered some serious impact to knock a chip out like that - and that can cause stress in the glass. If it was only the chip - it can be filled with black and reduce the chance for reflections - but the crack - ouch.
I would return it for a full refund and keep looking for another one. A $ 500 discount would not cover a Leica replacement of the rear element if it suddenly cracked or shattered.

 

[KM-25]

The only issue I have is looking at that crack next to the chip. And wondering if that would spread...

I'm pretty sure it is not a crack but where the scratching object left or entered the surface of the glass. A crack would have had the same refractive quality that the missing glass does like one sees on a broken window.

But I share your concern, that is a good point. I'll run another test roll tomorrow because in looking at one of the images closer, I might be seeing something. The shot in question was pointed at a white ceiling 8 feet away at minimum focus @F16. I see a very faint out of focus area that is slightly lighter on the neg ( darker on the image ).

Oh well, at least I am not out anything really, just need to decide and move onward....

 

[Fixcinater]

How often do you shoot blank white ceilings at f/16?

 

[Ranchu]

The sky?

:dance:

 

[KM-25]

How often do you shoot blank white ceilings at f/16?

And don't forget, it was focused at 2 feet, LOL! It was merely a stress test, you start there and get into more "normal" situations as you progress.

I did a little math, it represents about .0109 of the total surface area...Don Goldberg told me to maybe darken it with a fine point sharpie....I think even that is too big....I'm going to bed.

 

[Pete B]

Return it. Let the seller take the hit. These often come up on uk ebay, and Ffords in UK have 6 available, 2 of which are new. You'll find another
Pete

 

[Fixcinater]

And don't forget, it was focused at 2 feet, LOL! It was merely a stress test, you start there and get into more "normal" situations as you progress.

I did a little math, it represents about .0109 of the total surface area...Don Goldberg told me to maybe darken it with a fine point sharpie....I think even that is too big....I'm going to bed.

I'd put good money on you never being able to see any artifacts in real use.

The real question is whether this will bother you in the future every time you take off the lens or if you'll look at it and think of what you did with the $500 you saved. I'd put it in my travel account and not think twice.

 

[john_s]

I have a lens that I've used some black paint on to ameliorate a scratch and I'm very happy to keep using it. But I didn't pay anything like the price of this ASPH. I have cheap lenses and a couple of very expensive ones. In the case of expensive Leica glass I feel that the high price is partly justified by the future resale value. In this case, future resale value would be severely limited and so, I would return the lens and wait for another.

 

[teddy]

My 2 cents is that it will mostly likely not do any difference to the image. I have a Zeiss Planar 80/2.8 with the same thing - perfect images even in direct sunlight and all sorts of angles. But for the price - ouch, well return it unless you get a massive discount...

 

[KM-25]

Hi, I appreciate all the input folks.

In plain terms for those on here who would even consider it, if you were looking for a user 35mm 1.4 Asph, not a mint version, given a proven outcome that the defect on the rear glass not having any effect in 99.999% of shooting situations, what would one expect this particular lens to sell for?

Bear in mind it is otherwise mint, 6 bit with caps, shade, filter and box.

I'm just trying to get other perspectives than return it and hold out for a perfect one.

 

[x-ray]

A tiny Mark like this will most likely never show. I've owned many lenses with serious scratches and never seen any effect. It'll have no more effect than bubbles in the glass which have no effect at all.

 

[splitimageview]

How recent is the ASPH, what serial? Is it the FLE or the previous version? Is it factory 6 bit or third party? Does it have the box and leather case, shade, caps, all in perfect shape?

Assuming it is the non-FLE with all the accessories in perfect shape, those are going for $3k-$3200 from reliable known sellers and there are even a couple of outliers from known dealers as high as $3900+. KEH has a couple in the same range but those are lens only, no accessories.

35/2 ASPHs are in the $2K-$2400 range.

 

[sc_rufctr]

I'd return it but I'll admit I'm pedantic when it comes to my gear.

It's not just a light scratch. It would definitely take a decent hit to cause that sort of damage.

 

[michaelwj]

I'd return it and pay a bit more for a clean copy. The extra cash will be forgotten in a decade, but if you notice the scratch once in a photo it'll be a sour moment.
I'm with Tom A, rear scratches are far worse than front ones.

 

[KM-25]

Quite the variety of replies, not a surprise though, in a good way.

The lens is a 385xxxx with the box, caps, shade, case and filter and other than the nick, it looks brand new. It was 6 bit coded by DAG about three years ago according to the seller, would be easy to verify because he is my primary Leica tech.

I have now shot two rolls with this lens and have flat out tortured it in terms of trying to reveal the nick's affect on image quality. Other than the barely detectable out of focus darker area seen against a white wall at F16, I see nothing but perfect images. We are talking sun in the frame, just out of frame, the LED from my iPhone blasting into the lens, you name it, no issues and no surprise really.

So tomorrow I will do some more tests using my friend's A7II and M adapter. If no issues surface I will consider getting the lens for a considerably lower offer I made earlier this evening.

Yes, having even a microscopic nick like this one in the center 1/3rd of a rear element of a precise optic like is to be usually avoided at all costs. But I have spent the better part of the day talking to optical experts even from Leica and the unanimous consensus is that this will have likely no effect at all in any shooting situation.

I can still return it and bow out but the notion of getting a lens like this that seems to work perfectly for less than 2K is starting to be hard for this heavy user to pass up.

I'll let you know how it turns out...

 

[sc_rufctr]

It sounds like you've decided to keep it but why not contact Leica and ask them how much would it cost to replace the rear element.
Replacing the rear element would be the worst case scenario but contacting Leica might give you a pleasant surprise.

 

[Doug]

Similar to your experience, I have a 21mm Biogon for Contax G sold by KEH as "bargain" condition but which appeared perfect to me. So I was curious about the reason for that designation. In close examination my local repair tech found a small nick on the rear element. I've never been able to detect any effect in the photos, and I hope you have similarly good results!