i have an offer to buy a 1,4/35 `cron lense with serial number 2391561 in good condition. but the lense has a little, very thin scratch in the front linse over app. 1cm. is sutch a scratch in any way visible in pictures? who has experience about...as i said the scratch seems to be very thin.

-- rainer viertlböck (viertl@navegalia.com), April 01, 2002

Answers

Rainer,

Test the lens. Shoot an even black surface with harsh backlight hitting the front lens from different angles. Step down (although you might use the 1.4/35 lux - not 'cron? - mostly wide open) to f16 and focus the nearest possible (0.9m, right?). Make a print (or scan) with shallow contrast. Go search the scratch. Should be a blurred slightly lighter than the background line. Don't see it under such severe testing circumstances? Go buy the lens and never mind the scratch again. Cheers.

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), April 01, 2002.

PS.: What's the price? You might bargain with respect to the fact that because of the scratch it might be difficult for you to re-sell the lens one day - to anybody not willing to test it... ;o)

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), April 01, 2002.

what should be the price for such a lense? i will not sell her soon again and it would be usefull for me to have her...is a 1,4 lense with this serious number unsharper than my 2/35 cron with ser.number 2739772 ? i will not make any testings....if the scratch will just be visible under such extreme conditions i dont care it at all. i like to use my cameras for photos not for fetisch.....

-- rainer viertlböck (viertl@navegalia.com), April 01, 2002.

Rainer,

Please don't misinterpret me. I'm not saying it *will be visible only under such extreme circumstances* as I do not know your * specific* scratch! This is just the worst case scenario and *if* the lens should pass this test, there will be nothing to worry about. A mint pre-asph 35 lux can be found from USD 750 up, with some luck. The hood adds considerably to the value. Be aware though, that the pre asph is very special wide open, i.e. prone to strong flare which dissappears only when stepped down to f2... Wide open it gives you kind of that David-Hamilton-touch you can mimic by exhaling onto the front element and then quickly shooting. At 1.7 however it will give you that special mix of bokeh, sharpness and a tiny amount of flare that I've never seen in any other lenses performance. So, if you're after such an effect, go for it. For the rest stick to your pre-asph cron which is sharper and focusses closer. Bests.

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), April 01, 2002.

thanks Lutz... i will go on with my cron. i wanted to change one again the other lenses. one thing really important in my little m-system ( vl 15mm; 2/35mm; 2,8/90mm ) is that it has so little weight and produce so good pictuerse. to have 2 35mm lenses? i prefere to buy a more expansive asp. lense if they is as sharp as a 2/35. i just would like to have one lense for very less light.....and i think the 1,4/35 is the most usefull of this lenses. i can shoot with one speed slower than with 50mm and it is not sooo critical in focus wide opened..... thanks for helping

-- rainer viertlböck (viertl@navegalia.com), April 01, 2002.

Lutz, you are right on concerning the pre-asph summilux. I love the look at f1.7. When possible, I stop down 1/2 stop from wide-open and I get a beautiful tonality and sharpness combination that just makes for great prints. The size is also such a plus. Sometimes I carry it instead of the Noctilux, because of its compactness. Its just easier to be discreet with than the Noct. All in all, for the going prices, I think its a great lens and I wouldn't part with mine. And I've never seen a slight front element scratch affect an image. I have seen a rear element scratch on a f4 super-angulon that showed up on film as a blurry spot, even wide-open, because of the proximity of the rear element to the film and its great depth of field. I have seen a 105 f2.5 nikkor that had a 1 inch and deep scratch on the back element. This lens still made beautiful images. Not to say it wouldn't be better without it, but even to a critical eye it made great prints. Just my $.02.

-- Jim Gumm (jim.gumm@okdhs.org), April 01, 2002.

Rainer, don't worry about reselling the lens. There are several individuals over on the LUG who are confident that Leica lenses can't be scratched and berate anyone who uses UV filters. One of them would surely want to buy the lens from you :>)

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), April 01, 2002.

I have an old 50 DR-Summicron with a scuff in the center of the front element--probably similar to a few of the scratches you mention. I don't know how its performance compares to a pristine example of the same lens, but no one has complained about the technical quality of the images it produces.

I wouldn't worry about the scratch's effect on lens performance (though I would use it as a bargaining tool).

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), April 01, 2002.

I had a 180 f/2.8 Nikkor with a 'scratch' - actually a young version of the Grand Canyon: so deep and wide you could catch a fingernail in it - and 1/2 inch long.

It did not affect picture quality in any VISIBLE way - no flare, no softness, no uneven 'bokeh' - nada (I shot a few comparison shots with another 180 - couldn't tell 'em apart.) In aggregate I sold probably $2000 worth of pictures from that lens (and I'm not a full-time pro) - which is 10 times what I paid for it in it's damaged condition.

But testing is the only way to be sure.

As Lutz and others noted - the 35 1.4 (NOT ASPH) is not terribly good at f/1.4 - with or without a scratch!

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), April 01, 2002.