Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,542   Posts: 1,544,390   Online: 1004
      
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Magnificent Rockies
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    539
    Images
    1

    Optical Engineers/Glass Experts: Advice on lens damage

    I have on occasion run across lenses offered at really good prices that have cleaning marks/scratches/abrasions on the front or rear lens surfaces.

    For the most part the ones I grabbed had problems with front surfaces but that had to be pretty bad before it was noticed on the neg, usually in the form of flare/ghosts.

    My question is: Damage to which surface will be more readily seen on negs, front element or rear element? Or does it really matter?

    I once purchased a dropped 50/2 Summicron for $5 and black lacquered the moon shaped crack on the edge of the front element and used it for many years with no noticeable effect other than it was probably an f2.2 lens. Ugly as all get out but print for print it matched just about anything out there!

    -Fred

  2. #2
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,596
    Images
    122
    I'm neither an optical engineer or a glass expert but I think that scratches will show up as increased flare rather than actual marks on the negative.

    scratches, and even air bubbles, are so far out of focus that they will not show up as individual entities in an image.



    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Magnificent Rockies
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    539
    Images
    1
    So which is worse, front element damage or rear element damage? I seem to recall reading rear element damage is substantially worse.

    -Fred
    Last edited by Fred Aspen; 02-13-2009 at 03:30 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #4
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Fred Aspen View Post
    I think I remember reading rear element damage is substantially worse.

    -Fred
    That's what my camera repair guys have told me.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Hawaii
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    715
    Rear is worst, more negative effect with smaller damage. Nicks can be dotted out with very black ink, actual scratches or gouge can be really bad, especially on wides. Fronts are much less serious, shooting situations where a bit of flare from cleaning/coating marks usually can be worked around or avoided, tele's are more resistant to abuse. I've seen a Nikkor 200/2 with a completely translucent quarter sized patch of well worn front element glass, the lens was still sharp.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin