Should I return this Dallmeyer Pentac 8" f2.9?

[maxcooperavl]

Hello! First post here and I'm a total newb. I have a passing familiarity with large format but no experience. I'd like to start shooting portraits and of course was attracted to the Aero Ektar style lenses. I ordered a Dallmeyer Pentac 8" f/2.9 for $275 on eBay with the intention of adapting it to a Speed Graphic. The lens was described as "glass with minimum of scratches / separation not important for the pictures. aperture in good working condition."

Unfortunately the seller neglected to mention significant fungus, mostly around the edges of the lens. It's a reputable seller, so I'm now wondering if a certain amount of fungus is acceptable in these old lenses? Here's an image:



Obviously, I want the lens for a soft-focus look, so I'm wondering if I shouldn't just live with the fungus. On the other hand, fungus is progressive . . .

Thanks in advance for your wisdom!

[Dan Fromm]

That lens is filthy. Send it back.

[Dugan]

+1
Return it.

[Mark Sawyer]

Agreed, return it.

[maxcooperavl]

Alright. Three unanimous votes means the lens goes back. Thanks everyone!

[Two23]

The seller might be reputable but he also has poor eyesight.


Kent in SD

[LabRat]

That's not soft focus, that's low contrast!!!

Steve K

[pgk]

The seller might be reputable but he also has poor eyesight.

Isn't it odd that many such sellers of photographic equipment have poor eyesight and seem unable to take sharp, correctly focussed photographs. Strange!

[J. Patric Dahlen]

Isn't it odd that many such sellers of photographic equipment have poor eyesight and seem unable to take sharp, correctly focussed photographs. Strange!

Autofocus, maybe, and when they write: Autocorrection. They must have bad monitors as well, when they can't see the details like fungus in a lens in the higly enlarged digital photos on the screen.