What to do with hazy lenses

sreed2006

sreed2006

Well-known
Local time
4:06 AM
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,032
I have two lenses that suffer from significant haze (pitted coating and scratches). The haze results in low-contrast pictures. Here is an example from the hazier of the lenses, taken from the CD of a one-hour lab's scan.


Hazy lens results by sreed2006, on Flickr

(Just for information, the lenses are collapsible Leica Elmars, 50/3.5 and 50/2.8.)

My questions are: Is there any type of photography for which a hazy lens is a good choice, like foggy weather, wrinkled skin, or nightscapes? Or, should I try to get them re-polished and re-coated? Or, toss them in the circular file?
 
sell them on ebay, honestly describing the flaws - that's what i did with a coll. summicron in similar condition. got almost 300€ for it and felt kinda bad even though i didn't lie one bit about its condition. people still pay a lot for ltm lenses even if they are scratched, fogged and the elements seperating.
 
What are the results like in better lighting conditions? To be honest that just looks like an underexposed image in less than ideal lighting.
 
NeeZee said:
sell them on ebay, honestly describing the flaws - that's what i did with a coll. summicron in similar condition. got almost 300€ for it and felt kinda bad even though i didn't lie one bit about its condition. people still pay a lot for ltm lenses even if they are scratched, fogged and the elements seperating.
Click to expand...

It is amazing that there is a market for lenses in such bad condition. Do the purchasers just look at them, then put them in a drawer, I wonder?

I bought an Olympus OM-2n one time that was almost beyond hope and then had it restored. Getting parts replaced and the camera working cost more than it was worth. But, now I have a nice camera and a little bit of pride that I saved it from the dumpster. Maybe that is what purchasers are doing with these Leica lenses.
 
hairydale said:
What are the results like in better lighting conditions? To be honest that just looks like an underexposed image in less than ideal lighting.
Click to expand...

Here is the same lens with totally different lighting.

This is the one-hour lab's CD scan, untouched:


Haze in lens by sreed2006, on Flickr


And here is the picture with levels adjusted in the Gimp:


52230030_levels by sreed2006, on Flickr


When I shine a flashlight through the bottom of the lens and look down through the glass, I can see lots of defects and haze. It shows up in the scanned pictures as kind of a veil or fog over the image. The images can be post-processed to look better, but that's a lot of work on a 36 exposure roll.
 
I also have one camera with hazy lens - Agfa Sensor Flash. I decided the repair is probably impossible/too expensive for 10 EUR camera, so I might use it for pictures where I want low contrast/mist effect. I think it can give kinda "retro" look to the photo.
 
valdas said:
I also have one camera with hazy lens - Agfa Sensor Flash. I decided the repair is probably impossible/too expensive for 10 EUR camera, so I might use it for pictures where I want low contrast/mist effect. I think it can give kinda "retro" look to the photo.
Click to expand...

I would love to see sample images where the haze added to the look of the image. I like "retro" images, and if there is a way to use these lenses to accomplish that look, that would be great.
 
The haze on a 50mm 3.5 Elmar is often just inside the front element, next to the aperture, it is not too difficult to get at...either for you or repairman. Simple cleaning is not expensive and makes a great difference though you may lose some coating. Forget re-polishing etc.

Michael
 
I had an old uncoated 3,5 Elmar that I had cleaned up and the haze was corrected but there was no coating to start with. You might try Youxin Ye but the coating might not survive.... I actually like uncoated lenses I just use a hood in sunlight.
 
The haze can be removed if you are careful. The haze usually occurs on the inside rear element, and is caused by the lubricant which Leica used when the lens was assembled. The haze should be cleaned off as soon as it is noticed, otherwise it eats into the lens coating. You can clean the haze with a pure cotton swab and lens cleaning fluid, but make sure to use a very light touch. If the coating is damaged, it will have to be polished off with toothpaste.
 
The adjusted image looks pretty good so the lab aren't getting the best out of the negs. The curse of auto settings I suppose. The lab I worked at corrected the scans and would never have produced images like the first version.

Certainly looks like it's worth looking at getting it cleaned though.
 
The lenses had been sitting in a drawer or closet somewhere in Texas for years, until the owner passed away and his nephew put all the items up for sale last year.

The Elmar 50/3.5 was serviced by Sherry Krauter last year. The Elmar 50/2.8 was serviced by DAG last year. I feel confident both lenses were cleaned as best they could be.

DAG mentioned the pitted coating, but did not suggest any option to fix it.
 
It is better to remove the bad coating than to leave it in place. The Leica techs here in Japan will offer you that option if the coating is too far gone. The coating is intended to reduce glare and increase light transmission, but defective coatings are worse than having no coating at all. The cost for polishing and recoating is about $250 per surface, which is certainly not economical.

To remove the old internal coatings, I use cotton swabs and toothpaste. It takes about 30 minutes of work to get polsh off the glass clean. Forget about doing this on external lens coatings, those are quite tough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom