Question on haze/coating issue & scratches on lens

[Daniel Stone]

Hey all,

I just took receipt of a 12" Goodkin Graphinar, looks to be a Japanese-made dagor "clone". Single coated. Despite the listing saying it was scratch and haze-free(with no returns to boot, go figure), it arrived with both. Yay :(!!!

So my question is this: will this affect sharpness? I'm shooting 8x10, and have been moving from modern glass back to Artar's and Dagor's. This looked like a good option price-wise vs a 12" kern dagor, with lots of coverage IF I need it according to some references here on LFF and over on APUG.

Please consult the pictures below. When I look through the lens in normal ambient room light, it doesn't seem all that bad. But when backlit(like in picture #3 below), you can see the coating haze and scratches. I normally use a compendium lens shade when I shoot, so I do my best to minimize direct light from flaring the lens. But will this amount of haze and scratches affect the final contrast and/or sharpness on the film? Should I be looking for another copy of this lens? I like having clear glass, but if this won't be a problem, I might see about getting it shutter mounted(Copal 3 or Compound 3/4).

thanks

Dan

http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/yy161/mr_danielstone/graphinar_1.jpg

http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/yy161/mr_danielstone/graphinar_3.jpg

http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/yy161/mr_danielstone/graphinar_2.jpg

[Dan Fromm]

Scream misrepresentation and send it back. If you don't want to do that, take a shot with it and see how it does. Then send it back.

[Daniel Stone]

Hey Dan,

well I've sent a message to the seller, I didn't "scream", but asked politely :). They've stated they're willing to take it back, since they've somewhat admitted that they didn't look to closely, or see the scratches/haze. Too bad, I was really hoping for a nice mint- example to send over to SKG to get mounted. Too bad.

Any idea on the performance values of this lens vs a 12" modern(ish), like a Kern, Dagor?

thanks

-Dan

[E. von Hoegh]

That's horrible. Send it back.

[Daniel Stone]

Thanks guys, he's offered to take it back, so I'm going to get it shipped back today. Too bad, I was looking forward to a new toy(umm... tool) to enjoy :(

-Dan

[BrianShaw]

Previously cleaned with a Brillo pad?

[Daniel Stone]

well seeing that its a process lens, it might have lived a hard life in the same room as the developing chemicals. I've heard about coatings getting eaten/etched/fogged by the chemicals, IDK though...

[E. von Hoegh]

well seeing that its a process lens, it might have lived a hard life in the same room as the developing chemicals. I've heard about coatings getting eaten/etched/fogged by the chemicals, IDK though...

That lens didn't get scratched like that from developer. 80 grit sandpaper, maybe.

[Tracy Storer]

Yeah, I'd call that a significant example of "cleaning marks AKA scratches"

[Dan Fromm]

Dan, in the interest of solidarity among Dans, let me remind you that Boyer and Berthiot made dagor clones.

You might want to keep your eyes open for a 250/6.8 Boyer Beryl (sorry, you can't have mine) or a 225/6.8 Ser. VIb Berthiot Perigraphe. FWIW, I have 135/6.8 Beryl and Perigraphe, think that the Beryl is a hair better; remember that mine are both used lenses and that all the usual caveats about generalizing from a used lens' performance apply.

You might also acquire a copy of the VM -- Dan Collucci, who posts here as ccharrison sells it -- and look in it for other makes/models of dagor clones. Search for Q9. The VM has led me to a number of sleepers.

Happy hunting,

Dan

[ic-racer]

If you have already purchased the lens, perhaps you could tell if it affects sharpness.

I'd venture to say not much effect on sharpness but it will affect contrast. How do I know? I compared two lenses of the same brand and type; one had a similar disaster on both front and rear elements and the other had scratch-free glass.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v670/ic-racer/240mm2.jpg

[Daniel Stone]

well the lens is now in the mail back to the seller. So IC-R, I can't really test it myself anymore ;).

hopefully to find another clean copy sometime soon though

-Dan

[domaz]

I met a lens collector at a camera show who said that old-timers would often clean lenses with sandpaper on purpose to make common sharp lenses into potrait lenses. Not sure I believe him but it's a interesting theory. I did find a little Cine-Wollensak (from an 8mm camera) that had some kind of seperation issue going on that renders very interesting soft-focus like images when mounted on my Sony NEX. So I guess my point is if you get a flawed lens cheap enough it could still be useful.

[Daniel Stone]

Domaz,

I think that using the Vaseline on the lens trick would probably be easier, and reversible if it was ”too soft” ;)

I like my lenses sharp, nature ain't all that cushy, I personnally prefer the ”real deal”

Dan

[ic-racer]

well the lens is now in the mail back to the seller. So IC-R, I can't really test it myself anymore ;).

hopefully to find another clean copy sometime soon though

-Dan

Good choice.

[E. von Hoegh]

If you have already purchased the lens, perhaps you could tell if it affects sharpness.

I'd venture to say not much effect on sharpness but it will affect contrast. How do I know? I compared two lenses of the same brand and type; one had a similar disaster on both front and rear elements and the other had scratch-free glass.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v670/ic-racer/240mm2.jpg

And your conclusion was.....?

[ic-racer]

And your conclusion was.....?


"not much effect on sharpness but it will affect contrast"

[E. von Hoegh]

"not much effect on sharpness but it will affect contrast"
Apparently I have cleaning marks on my eyeballs......... (embarassed smiley)

[BrianShaw]

I have a cataract forming on my left eyeball... and can tell the difference. So when I want to take sharp photos i focus with the right, and for dreamy soft-focus photos I focus with the left. ;)

[CP Goerz]

Back in the day when arc type lights were used in process photography places the taking lens would have to be protected as the vapor/smoke/whatever would attack the coating. I know that Rodenstock used to sell cover glass that you could switch out if the surface became corroded in time, thus saving the actual lens itself.


If a lens has a few cleaning marks you really won't see a difference in image quality but with the profusion that I saw in your image that would certainly be a flare magnet. Sharpness wouldn't be affected but forget and backlight shots :-)

[Neal Chaves]

I have made many excellent 8X10 negatives with subject matter at infinity focus with a 355mm 9 G-Claron, a process lens, and I have made many satisfying prints from those same negatives through a 250mm 6.7 Fujinon W, a general purpose lens on the enlarger. You would probably be just as well-served for less money and bother with a recent 300mm 5.6 general purpose lens already in a Copal 3, than trying to cobble something together.

[Jim Galli]

Previously cleaned with a Brillo pad?

The brillo pad didn't work on that one so they broke out the steel wool and Comet Cleanser.

[Two23]

I think all eBay purchases are a crap shoot to one degree or another. Hopefully the seller is an honest one and concerned about future sales more than a quick buck. I have the grand daddy of all crapshoots coming in the mail to me right now. In a couple of days I'll know if I got the deal of my LF lifetime or crapped out.


Kent in SD