Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,220   Posts: 1,532,307   Online: 895
      
Page 1 of 8 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 72
  1. #1
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,107
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    7

    How damaged is your lens coating???

    I am a pro-- I have earned 100% of my income via image making since 1989.
    Anyway, I have used all manner of equipment, and my Hasselblad glass is still blemish free!
    BUT my new 16-35mm Nikkor has gotten quite a coating blemish(s) from rough/carless use recently.
    I usually scoff at people selling highly blemished Leica glass saying "does not effect images" as if this were the case why not send lenses out with blems from the factory.

    I have prepared to send the lens to Nikon for repair/replacement of front element.
    I shot an assignment (partly) with this lens this morning in a high flair situation... and at least in this instance I can not find evidence in image.

    Shall I wait to send it till I do? They are ugly central blemishes. I would rate the lens as a 5 on a 1-10 scale right now. I had a 20mm with a blem that showed up in images 20 years ago. Not really looking for answers/advice... Just wondering what the nastiest lens blem some of you have trusted your income with?

    Cheers.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,361
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    I am a pro-- I have earned 100% of my income via image making since 1989.
    Anyway, I have used all manner of equipment, and my Hasselblad glass is still blemish free!
    BUT my new 16-35mm Nikkor has gotten quite a coating blemish(s) from rough/carless use recently.
    I usually scoff at people selling highly blemished Leica glass saying "does not effect images" as if this were the case why not send lenses out with blems from the factory.

    I have prepared to send the lens to Nikon for repair/replacement of front element.
    I shot an assignment (partly) with this lens this morning in a high flair situation... and at least in this instance I can not find evidence in image.

    Shall I wait to send it till I do? They are ugly central blemishes. I would rate the lens as a 5 on a 1-10 scale right now. I had a 20mm with a blem that showed up in images 20 years ago. Not really looking for answers/advice... Just wondering what the nastiest lens blem some of you have trusted your income with?

    Cheers.
    I'm not a pro and have not worked professionally since the very early 1990s. I don't mind a fine cleaning wisp, if you use (as I do) lenses from 80 to 100+ years old you have to live with minor marks most of the time.

    I have a 9 1/2" Dagor in a good early Compound which I picked up at a show. It has a 9mm scratch - almost a gouge - right in the center of the rear outer element - the worst possible location. I painted the blemish black, and the lens is just fine. I have another of the same vintage and focal length to compare it with and can find no effect. I don't think I did paying work with this lens, but I wouldn't hesitate to.

    The front element of my 105 Nikkor has some light abrasions, which so far have caused no trouble - but I'm fairly fanatical about using proper lens hoods on all my lenses whether they are coated or not.

  3. #3
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,959
    Images
    74
    This article might set you at ease....
    Dirty Lens Article
    http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html

    Though I know not your type of work (eg macro product photog)....

    But according to the above your scenario should* not impact quality...

    *But with all things on the net...your mileage may vary....
    Andy

  4. #4
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,589
    Images
    122
    "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.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    522
    Images
    1
    I had a Industar 22 that had a bunch of cleaning marks. Not quite 'took sandpaper to the lens' but not far off from it.

    It did fine at times when stopped down:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/5044331116

    But it also would 'glow' much more than I liked:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/5044330656

    That lens put me off to anything with excessive cleaning marks for general purpose use. Enough scratches causes results similar to a hazy lens. That said, I don't mind how they work with some shots:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/4800562503

    In general, my issue with cleaning marks and haze is that it makes predicting the lenses behavior more of a challenge. It also means that I may not be able to get the look I want in a high contrast situation. Its easier to 'add' this effect with filters if/when the look is desired.

  6. #6
    Mark Feldstein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Monterey, CA / BiCoastal NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    163
    BUT my new 16-35mm Nikkor has gotten quite a coating blemish(s) from rough/carless use recently.


    VP:
    I'm wondering whether that lens is still under warranty and whether it had a coating problem from the factory that allowed it to get blemished from your "rough use". I'd talk to Nikon before sending it in and see if they're willing to replace it based on the serial number and batch.

    The other thing I'm wondering is what you could have done to cause this. Knowing that might help out others here.
    Mark
    _________________________________
    Without guys like John Coltrane, Count Basie and Duke Ellington, life....would be meaningless.

  7. #7
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,168
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    I shot an assignment (partly) with this lens this morning in a high flair situation... and at least in this instance I can not find evidence in image.
    So, you had a 'loaner' lens of the same type with perfect glass and shot side-by-side negatives to compare the contrast?

  8. #8
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,107
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Feldstein View Post
    BUT my new 16-35mm Nikkor has gotten quite a coating blemish(s) from rough/carless use recently.


    VP:
    I'm wondering whether that lens is still under warranty and whether it had a coating problem from the factory that allowed it to get blemished from your "rough use". I'd talk to Nikon before sending it in and see if they're willing to replace it based on the serial number and batch.

    The other thing I'm wondering is what you could have done to cause this. Knowing that might help out others here.
    Mark
    I was sort of thinking the same... but wouldn't whine to them. I have a 105mm 1.8 that has been through the wringer and still no marks. The Hasselblad stuff I have has been in steel mills.. no marks. That being said, I think another lens was set on-top of it.. my micro 55 and bounce all over the element. Metal on glass = lots of marks and cringes.. Again not a conclusive test, but I have yet to have seen issues in my images yet. Now for Leica flint glass that is all hazy... they do effect the images no mater what optimistic sellers say.

  9. #9
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,107
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    7
    Thanks for this... it's hilarious...
    http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008...ment-scratches...
    My lens if far from that bad but again... I think it nearly in KEH bargain condition.

  10. #10
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SE Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,539
    Images
    15
    Having worked professionally for two decades I never once had to report a damaged lens element or coatiing; occasional filter damage, yes, that's expected, and the filter has done it's job. I would think that blemishes of what you are describing would only manifest in a troubling manner if you are shooting contra jour or into another strong (artificial) light source where flare and scatter will be evident. You might also benefit from putting on a multi-coated filter to provide a bit more protection.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






Page 1 of 8 1234567 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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