Older lenses

[lauren_macintosh]

<p>when viewing lens for sale one run's upon many descriptions for the lens condition at the present time how does one understand what is really wrong with the lens other than maybe a good cleaning could fix I read this ad for a lens and got intrigued ,have thought of buying it ? here is the statement for the lens "The glass has a whitish hazy fog on an inner element. Cloudy, not spider web like". does this mean one could simply take the lens apart and just clean it and have a good lens in the end .<br /> thanks a lot for your time : Lauren</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>The vendor is trying to suggest that the blotch is <em>not</em> fungus, but</p>

<ul>

<li>that isn't necessarily the case</li>

<li>without knowing what lens it actually is, the ease or difficulty of a 'cleaning' is totally unclear, even if it were only some oil redeposited on the elements.</li>

</ul>

<p>Unless the lens is very rare, the difficulty of "cleaning" may be much greater than the value of the lens in better shape on the open market.</p>

<p>You should assume the worst in such a case and bid accordingly.</p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>Taking a lens apart can be a horror show, I know. Pitfalls: the haze, fungus or other debris may actually be more than just cleaning the inner elements, it may involve balsam crazing-separation, repair not for the faint of heart/ removing elements or groups may require special tools (spanner or rubber cup to fit beauty ring)/ crosspoint drivers different than philips head, may be needed/ the screwws may be locked with a chemical requiring heat to loosen/ a helix that becomes disengaged can be a real problem as starting point cannot vary/ shims may be present that separate lens groups/ elements may look the same but must be returned in the same configuration as before(not reversed)/ elements may be chipped if not set level before tightening the threaded locking rings/ and on and on.</p>

[gnashings]

<p>Unfortunately there is only a handful of places that have worked hard and earned a stellar reputation for rating their used equipment in a fair, accurate and consistent manner (KEH comes to mind). This is not the case with private sellers, and even those who go to great lengths to provide an honest description and even photo evidence of their wares' condition leave a lot open to interpretation. Then there is a boat load of those who either have an overabundance of optimism or hope to gain that extra dollar or two by downplaying the flaws present in their items... As such, JDM's advice to assume the worst and bid accordingly is the best approach to take. Unless the seller insists the item is flawless, making it plainly an open and shut case to return the item if its not, its best to count any item (especially a lens) as a case of getting lucky if it turns out to be better than described.<br>

Of course, this doesn't stop many of us from tinkering, and if its something you're into, it is very satisfying to get rescue an old lens or camera with your own two hands - but its never fun to go into such an endevour with the knowledge that you spent a great deal of money on something and not only is it not working now, it may be worst off when you're done with it... Caveat emptor, know thyself, the grass is always greener, penny-wise and pound-foolish and a few other cliches fit nicely:)</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p><strong>Lauren</strong>, buying lenses on the auction sites is always a gamble; even if a seller isn't setting out to deceive, sheer lack of knowledge may result in a flawed description. I'm always a bit wary of "haze", preferring small amounts of "fungus", any day. Generally, unless the lens is highly desirable at a very good price, or dirt cheap and interesting, I avoid lenses that obviously require dis-assembly and cleaning. Great advice from JDM and Paul, above. And Peter, who is known to be adventurous...</p>

[SCL]

<p>Lauren - having disassembled and successfully reassembled a few, I can't recommend the process to somebody who doesn't have the specialty tools, access to schematics, as well as the proper lubricants. It truly is a crap shoot. However, if a lens is dirt cheap and you are willing to possibly part with a few dollars and hours as a learning experience, you might be pleasantly surprised. My family equated my work on lenses, even with tools and schematics, to my expertise in household plumbing...they would quietly leave the house for a few hours until the cursing quieted down.</p>

[starvy]

<p>Unless you can disassemble lenses I would not recommend buying it. Of course, if the seller is willing to take it back that is not a bad thing.</p>

[gnashings]

<p>Adventurous?! I was in college, it was a different time... wait... what?! ;)</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>EVEN IF YOU SEE THE MAGIC WORDS<br>

1-SNAPPY DIAPHRAGM<br>

2-SMOOTH FOCUS<br>

3-CLEAR GLASS<br>

it may or not be so.<br>

depending on the rarity of the lens and the pricing you may get a clue if it is really ok or not.<br>

I would hesitate less on a common lens sy=uch as a 35.28, or 135<br>

for a popular camear if the lens was reasonably priced<br>

or a ordinary zoom.<br>

but a more exotic lens such as a 85mm or a ultra wide or long,. In would be more cautious.<br>

I strongly would prefer to clean the lens myself- but you have no way of knowing if the seller scrubbed the lens with a klenex. look at the sellers feedback and avoid any too enthusuiastic<br>

descriptions. Possibly safer to buy from a semi ignorant seller<br>

I lucked out with an UNKNOWN 135mm lens that Obviously was for an old miranda with an external diaphragm button. Or a lens attaches to a telextender, the seller was too timid to try to separate the two</p>

<p>But I did buy a tele-zoom with a floating /rattling middle element<br>

but I got a refund)<br>

as said it can be iffy</p>

[lauren_macintosh]

<p>as they say there is nothing like an Old fool as I am , so I bought the Lens for 9.00 plus shipping 9.00<br>

so total is 18.00 dollars hey I look at it this way I have bought cameras for more and found them to be nothing but metal, end the end . I just thought it was a was good deal BOY can I think dumb ,LOL. so it looks like I just joined Stephen Lewis on fixing lenses even if I get that far, Oh yes the lens is a Manual lens no electronics > Thanks for all your thoughts and comments will let you know how bad the lens is after it gets here.</p>

<p>Now of those here how many repair they own cameras and lenses just for the heck of it !</p>

[subbarayan_prasanna]

<p>As said above by all: <strong>haze is a vague</strong> description. It could be innocuous like water vapour or it could be some permanent damage. Very difficult to examine, even visually, with an enlarger if it is in the inner element. If it is in the outer element and you have access to it you may try alcohol, naphtha or Ammonia with peroxide on it to see if it goes off. Otherwise, it is a gamble. I have restored over a dozen FSU and E.German lenses with such vague descriptions. Got lucky except in two cases of permanent damage to the glass. But I bought them at throw away prices, like $1.00 to $2.00 a piece or so. So take care. I must acknowledge, though, such lenses at throw-away prices provide an opportunity to learn dis-assembly and cleaning skills. Take care, sp.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Hey for $18, for nothing else, it's a good lesson on what digging into a lens is all about. I'm all thumbs yet even I successfully took apart, cleaned and got every thing back together correctly on several old lenses. Then, of course, there were a few I ruined beyond all hope. The swear jar filled up pretty quickly on those. It seems some lenses are simply easier to work on than others. </p>

[va3uxb]

<blockquote>

<p>Now of those here how many repair they own cameras and lenses just for the heck of it !</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I do - I just fixed a jammed Chaika-II the other night: <a href="http://planetstephanie.net/2011/09/14/late-night-camera-repair/">Late Night Camera Repair</a></p>

<p>I've had a few catastrophic failures with my 'home camera repair' but I've had even more successes. And it is always a learning experience. Nothing beats the feeling though of taking pictures with a camera that you've repaired yourself.</p>

<p>Good luck with the lens, and have fun!</p>

<p> </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I would say a $9 price is "bidding accordingly", for sure. Let us know how it comes out. ;)</p>

<p>I recently bought a really butchered Zeiss Biotar 58mm f/2 from Bulgaria, but it was honestly described with excellent pictures, and I considered it worth the price, given that it is in the rare M40 Praktiflex mount. I haven't had a chance to shoot it yet, but the view through the Praktiflex waist-level viewer gives me hope that it may yet prove to be useable, even if only for portrait work.</p>

[brett_rogers]

<blockquote>

<p>Now of those here how many repair they own cameras and lenses just for the heck of it !</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I've got a few cameras up and running well these last twelve months. Mostly Rollei TLRs and Zeiss Ikon Contaflice. I prefer the older German stuff from the 1950s and 1960s because build quality and finish was just <strong>so</strong> nice. As long as they haven't been stuffed around with, a good clean seems to get them working perfectly every time (well, almost).<br>

I'm not sure if I'm doing it just for the heck of it, though. Like many of us, I have limited funds, the cost of having many cameras professionally attended to is not economically viable, so, learning to repair them myself has become a necessity (albeit an interesting, and satisfying one) in order to enjoy equipment I either couldn't afford to buy in mint condition, or couldn't justify having repaired by someone else.<br>

Whilst it is always nice to get out and utilise a beautiful and well-crafted piece of precision engineering, I have to say that when it is one that you have brought back from the dead yourself, there is an extra dimension of involvement and pleasure derived from the experience that is immensely satisfying.</p>

[seth_.]

<p>Many of my user cameras have come as broken-down junk and are now fully functioning. They're all pre-ww2.<br>

I had tons of experience from a young age with all kinds of small electronics and mechanical repairs/fabrication so after some years, it didn't matter what you put in front of me, I could fix it.</p>

<p>What kind of lens did you get?</p>

[lauren_macintosh]

<p>Seth: I picked a 200mm F-4 petri lens for a petri camera that's coming , well see how bad it is when it gets here some time this week :<br>

thank you all for your comments and help on doing your own repairs :Lauren</p>

[seth_.]

<p>So it's not a zoom, right? if not, then you've got less parts to deal with. You may not have to get far into it to clean the haze off that lens element.<br /> Make sure you've got some decent jewellers screwdrivers and remember - if you need to unscrew/grab/twist/manipulate parts - wood and rubber won't mark metal. Metal to metal is gonna end in scratches.<br /> You can't go far wrong for $9.95 :)</p>

<p>Brett - My favourite repair so far involved wood-filler and sewing a new rubber-backed silk curtain for my Goerz, made circa 1894.<br>

It's great to tell people it can still make pictures at around 117 years old (whereas my last digtal P&S lasted a year and a day - just enough to break the warranty).</p>

[lauren_macintosh]

<p>Well its very clean as for the body goes and that one of the front element is very soft haze used flash light to find it : Will post fotos tomorrow :</p>

[jason_withers]

<p>$18 isn't a bad deal and if you can't "repair" it yourself, maybe you can send it off to a reputable company for work! If it's a good lens, it may be worth it!</p>