"Does not effect image"

[Toyon]

I think we should all drop the commonly used phrase, "does not effect the image". It is particularly difficult to prove that a chip, haze, schneideritis, rub mark, cleaning mark etc..., does not effect the image, unless exacting and precise measurements were taken before and after the damage.

Manufacturers of lenses know that careful control and precision have a significant effect on quality of a lenses' image. We can deduce from this that the issues listed above, will very likely have a negative effect on an image. To what degree? That is hard to assess. But "no effect", is extremely unlikely.

It is fair to say, "image remains sharp and contrasty", "image seems sharp compared to lenses without this issue", "I see no evidence that this has a significant effect on the images it produces".

[William Whitaker]

Besides, it's grammatically wrong.

[mdarnton]

I think we can count on people learning the difference between "effect" and "affect" when they have learned when an apostrophe belongs before an "s". That is, not in this world, ever.

[Toyon]

I think we can count on people learning the difference between "effect" and "affect" when they have learned when an apostrophe belongs before an "s". That is, not in this world, ever.

Most grammarians miss the point for the period.

[Sal Santamaura]

Most grammarians miss the point for the period.

No they don't. Most people who use sloppy, incorrect language fail to clearly communicate their point(s).

[Dan Fromm]

I think we can count on people learning the difference between "effect" and "affect" when they have learned when an apostrophe belongs before an "s". That is, not in this world, ever.

Charles' dog bit Michael.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I think we can count on people learning the difference between "effect" and "affect" when they have learned when an apostrophe belongs before an "s". That is, not in this world, ever.

It's "it is" or "it has", and if that confuses then have a gin and it.
Pardon my British.

[Ken Lee]

I muved this thred.

[Regular Rod]

i muved this thred.

rr

[goamules]

Goerz got it right in 1915, when they said "The presence of a few air bubbles does not in any way affect the work of the lens." There have been a lot of tests with horrible, cracked, scratched, chipped lenses, which show they create perfect photos.