Is it possible to have scratches ....

[Mike V]

as above...

is it possible to have scratches on a lens, even minor ones and they wont affect the image at all?

Not sure whether I can believe it or not.

I see a lot of lenses on ebay with slight marks but the sellers consider them in perfect working order.

What do we think guys?

[Gem Singer]

Minor scratches will not effect the image, noticeably.

Major scratches will effect the image to some extent.

Both types of scratches will effect the resale price of a lens.

[Mike V]

Thanks, is there any kind of rule of thumb to adhere to?

i.e. anything bigger than a hair will be noticeable or scratches closer to the centre will show more than those to the edge.

[Bruce Watson]

Is it possible to have scratches on a lens, even minor ones and they wont affect the image at all?

Absolutely. The reason this works is that all points on the lens reproduce the full image. If you have a scratch, all the rest of the lens is unaffected. There is of course *some* degradation -- like 0.0001 %. Nothing is perfect. But it's impossible to see it in your final print.

People even fill in chips in the glass with India Ink. Big honking black spot (so it won't generate any reflections or flare). No visible effect on the final print.

Old lenses are known for having bubbles in the glass. Likewise, no visible effect in the final print.

This leaves you with the question of "how much is too much" and that's something you'll have to decide on your own.

[Kevin Crisp]

My test is to look through the wide open lens at a bright light in a dark room. (Say, a Tensor lamp.) Alternatively, hold it in your hand and hold a BRIGHT LED light on the other side. Does the light smear and diffuse (fuzz) due to the scratches beyond the boundary of the light? If so, you're going to see it on film, especially when not stopped down. If the light looks like a bright light with nothing more than a little wisp here and there spilling over then it will be fine. But these severely affect value and if you don't have the lens in your hand before you decide to purchase, and/or can't return it, you are taking a chance.

Localized dings and single scratches, even if pretty deep, are unlikely to affect the image. If they catch light you can fill them in with a marker. What gets you is the damage from dry/abusive cleaning that causes widespread damage.

[Mike V]

Thanks for your replies guys. Much appreciated!

[bspeed]

this is....interesting...:

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008.10.30/front-element-scratches

[cblurton]

Take a look at this lens and the picture taken with it. Cracked and with a bug in between the lens elements, it still makes a nice image:

http://www.certo6.com/gallery/planar.html

[Mike V]

Both amazing links, really interesting! :O:O

[Jim Galli]

The scary ones are the ones that got cleaned with a brillo pad and just have microscopic swirls everywhere. Contrast with one of those really does suffer noticeably but you've at that point damaged a huge percentage of the original surface.

[Toyon]

Caveat: If a seller says "scratches/marks/haze/fungus will have no effect on the image quality" buy from someone else.

[Jim Jones]

The effect of lens scratches on the image can be reduced with a lens hood. Sometimes it's better to use a scratched lens with an efficient hood than a perfect lens without the hood.

[John Bowen]

this is....interesting...:

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008.10.30/front-element-scratches

WITH TONGUE FIRMLY PLANTED IN CHEEK.....

I'd be willing to bet that Jim Galli could take those photos and that lens, mix them together with some fine wordsmithing and turn the lens into a new Mercedes Benz :eek:

Jim, please don't take offense as none is intended. I just couldn't resist....

[mandoman7]

I got started in LF long ago when I had a chance to get an outfit that included 3 lenses along with the camera for small $. One of them, a 210 Schneider symmar of 60's or 70's vintage, had a large gouge in the back element, maybe 1/16th wide and 3/16 long, but thankfully off center. I got a lot of great photos with that lens and never noticed anything in the negs, in fact, it was the sharpest of the three in the box.

The camera didn't have a logo anywhere but I figured out it was a baby Deardorff after a while.

JY

[icefan13]

as above...

is it possible to have scratches on a lens, even minor ones and they wont affect the image at all?

Not sure whether I can believe it or not.

I see a lot of lenses on ebay with slight marks but the sellers consider them in perfect working order.

What do we think guys?


I used to know a photojournalist, with a major paper, who used to regularly use a lens with a big chunk chip out of the front element. It was pretty funny to see, and it didn't affect the images at all.

However, as for buying something damaged off of eBay, I wouldn't. Especially if the word 'perfect' is used anywhere to describe anything in which you can see visible damage. It would make me wonder what other damage is there.

I've had bad experiences buying items from eBay that were not described accurately.

[Paul Metcalf]

Doing a little house cleaning yesterday and noticed that my tiny Protar 183mm knock-off (relabled B&L) has a small scratch in the center of the rear element. Where from I have no idea, I think it was one of Jim's LGM spies fixing the market (aka Goldfinger :p). Most of the posts above talk about damage to the front element, and one post talks about a scratch off-center on the rear. Just looking for reassurance that a centered scratch on the rear element is NBD (can you see the worried look on my face?:( ). I can't see anything on the groundglass and my resupply of 8x10 film is in route so can't test. As an uncoated aged lens I already attempt to avoid flair as best as possible.