Worth using?

[bert26]

I bought this collapsible summicron about a month ago for pretty cheap, the only issue was that the aperture ring needed to be loosened and there was very slight haze. There were a few TINY scratches that were hardly noticeable.

Well, I dropped it off to get it CLA'd and a month later I get back and it looks this.

I was in a hurry leaving the repair shop and just got home to look at it. You'd never notice just by glancing at it but holy **** when you look up close. I didn't think I'd need to mention that the lens has soft elements to a reputable repair shop.

I'm sure the shop will deny all this up and down and I didn't take a before photo. Anyway, is thing even worth using or should I cut my losses? I don't have a ton of time to shoot anymore and when I am out walking around I'm shooting difficult street pictures and don't wanna waste my time with a piece of **** lens. Sucks sucks sucks.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

It looks like everyone in a hurry here.

First, a moron who scratched it.
Second, an owner who can't even bother to remove haze filter from it, before taking lens pictures. 🙂

Haze filter is irrelevant to the street photography, but hood is...

 

[skopar steve]

Shoot a roll of film with it having the light source in different positions and see what you get.

 

[bert26]

It looks like everyone in a hurry here.

First, a moron who scratched it.
Second, an owner who can't even bother to remove haze filter from it, before taking lens pictures. 🙂

Haze filter is irrelevant to the street photography, but hood is...

Uhhh what? I leave a filter on all my lenses. And there’s no hood because I wasn’t out shooting photos.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

The filter will probably cause more flare and reflection off the front element than the front element without the filter. Haze filters are a great gimmick but physics rules out the filter doing anything more than the glass because the lens itself will absorb more than 90% of the UV which causes haze. If there is haze its because of the design of the lens itself or it needing cleaning.
A hood will be the best thing you can do for this lens. Shoot it and enjoy it. Don't worry about faults you haven't seen yet in images that haven't been made.

Phil Forrest

 

[bert26]

The filter will probably cause more flare and reflection off the front element than the front element without the filter. Haze filters are a great gimmick but physics rules out the filter doing anything more than the glass because the lens itself will absorb more than 90% of the UV which causes haze. If there is haze its because of the design of the lens itself or it needing cleaning.
A hood will be the best thing you can do for this lens. Shoot it and enjoy it. Don't worry about faults you haven't seen yet in images that haven't been made.

Phil Forrest

Gotcha. The lens looks just as bad without the filter on, but didn’t care to take pictures of it again. I only use BW Haze filters to protect the glass. That’s it. I’ve had one on my 35 ‘cron since the day I got it and have never taken it off. But I guess with this 50, since it’s alreasy beat to ****, the idea is to use no UV filter as that will amplify the effects of the haze and scratches? And I ALWAYS use a hood when I’m shooting.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Gotcha. The lens looks just as bad without the filter on, but didn’t care to take pictures of it again. I only use BW Haze filters to protect the glass. That’s it. I’ve had one on my 35 ‘cron since the day I got it and have never taken it off. But I guess with this 50, since it’s alreasy beat to ****, the idea is to use no UV filter as that will amplify the effects of the haze and scratches? And I ALWAYS use a hood when I’m shooting.

Basically, the UV filter does nothing but possibly protect the front element from scratching or impacts. There is no way that a free is not going to impact the way a lens draws though. If you put glass in an optical path it becomes part of the formulation. I took my DR Summicron on a 6 month deployment to Iraq and aside from a friend dropping it onto a marble floor, the optics never suffered. Granted, it wasn't as notoriously soft as your lens but I am a firm believer that I shouldn't be putting a filter in front of an expensive and fine optical block unless I want that filter to affect the way the lens draws or how the film reacts to light. Otherwise it is only degrading the image. If you have a filter with a reflective surface or coating, you'll get ghosts from your front element. Even Leica and Heliopan filters do this occasionally.

Phil Forrest

 

[jsrockit]

I would use it... of course it'll flare more and will lose some contrast, but you could get some nice surprises. You'd also be surprised how much damage it takes for a lens to not be able to make a photo: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/10/front-element-scratches/

 

[02Pilot]

Shoot it. I've got a Summar that had a quite literally opaque front element when I got it; polishing it up got rid of the worst of the damage, but it's far from perfect. A deep hood will help, but it's not going to make much difference in the majority of shooting situations. Unless you make massive prints, you'll likely never notice the effects of the damage.

 

[Dogman]

Takes some pictures with it. Shoot like you normally do, don't try to do a clinical lens test that will reveal all the faults you just want to see if the lens works acceptably for your use. My bet is the lens will perform fine except for possibly shooting against the light.

And using a filter to protect the front element is a good idea. Especially on a lens with soft coatings. There's a Lens Rental blog out there somewhere about protection filters you might want to search for. It's a little technical for my simple mind but it lists those UV/Clear filters that are acceptable. IIRC, Lens Rental's Roger Cicala uses protection filters.

 

[Dez]

Give it a try. There are lots of people around who seem to love old Summars, which, although quite sharp, will fight contrast wherever it is found. Now you don't need to look for one, if that's your thing. Seriously, the effect can be attractive for some photography.
Unfortunately, Focal Point closed recently. That used to be a great place to get old Summicron front elements polished and hard coated.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[Robert Lai]

I keep a UV filter on the front of my collapsible Summicron exactly because the glass is so soft. A hood won't help with blowing sand or abrasive grit. The filter can take the abuse, not the front element. While the filter may increase some flare / ghosting in extreme backlit situations, I've not noticed any major effects from a B+W MRC filter. Yes, I've done the comparison at night with a street lamp lit scene (lamp in the picture also), with the camera on a tripod, using no filter as a control, and then trying various different UV filters.

Because of filter use, my front element is in perfect condition. Also, I had Don Goldberg remove the haze from the lens. I'm not in a hurry, and i waited literally months for him to get around to it. It's still a lens I use regularly.

You may as well try shooting with it. The front element can look awful, yet the lens may still produce a nice image.
Rear element damage will make a greater impact on the image.

 

[ktmrider]

Have kept UV or skylight filters on all my lenses since 1970. I remember rock climbing with one of my cameras around my neck and looking down and seeing a large spider web crack in the glass. Luckily, it was the filter and not the front element of the lens.