tredlie Posted March 27, 2012 Share #1 Â Posted March 27, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) The title says it: how relevant is a "slighty hazy" lens for image quality? Or is there anything that can be done about it? Â Tre Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Hi tredlie, Take a look here How bad is lens haziness. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted March 27, 2012 Share #2 Â Posted March 27, 2012 How long is a piece of string? Â It really depends on how bad the haze is. Most older lenses will have a degree of it, and in most cases it won't make any real world difference to the images. More haze will cause lower contrast and slightly softer images. Â You can usually have the lens cleaned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted March 27, 2012 Share #3 Â Posted March 27, 2012 Fungus, fine scratches, condensation in some cases... Which element(s) are affected? Haziness on the rear element is often worse than on the front one. Hard to say how bad it is - and what can be done - without looking at the lens itself. If it can be fixed, it will most likely require disassembling the lens and cleaning it. I wouldn't try it myself though: such a job is best done by a specialist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 27, 2012 Share #4 Â Posted March 27, 2012 I would get in touch with one of the well known Leica technicians or Leica CS and have them evaluate the lens, find out if it can be cleaned and adjusted, and what the cost would be. Â Good luck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jneilt Posted March 27, 2012 Share #5 Â Posted March 27, 2012 how long is a piece of string is a good reference! Â I bought a lens with haze on it. The haze was due to off-gassing and was on the rear element. I had a 30 day return policy and on my inspection, it was not that bad, although there was some loss of contrast. I sent it off to Gus who removed it and tightened up some loose stuff and it is like a brand new lens. FWIW the lens was a steal because of the haze...I got into a 90 for less than 1K (lens plus CLA). I would not have attempted this without a return offer. Â Your milage may vary. If an element is etched, your up a creek so to speak. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted March 27, 2012 Share #6 Â Posted March 27, 2012 ... If an element is etched, your up a creek so to speak. True, but then that'll be fungus rather than haze, which is a very different story. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted March 28, 2012 Share #7 Â Posted March 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) The least little haze shows as a strange undefinable deterioration in image quality. ONCE YOU SEE IT, you will never forget it. Â Light haze can usually be cleaned. Â So none is acceptable to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrybed Posted March 28, 2012 Share #8  Posted March 28, 2012 I recenty obtained a 35mm 2.8 Summaron which had, I would say, 'a little haze.' I shot some test negatives and then sent the lens out to be cleaned, by a well-known expert, and it was. It came back clear as new. I then shot a second round of tests with it and I could not see any difference at all between the first negs. and the second. This is with Tri-X. I don't think a little haze is much of a problem. Of course if it is 'a lot of haze', that's a different problem..Robbie  http://robbiebedell.photoshelter.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tredlie Posted March 28, 2012 Author Share #9  Posted March 28, 2012 Dear All  the answers were indeed most helpful also in putting things into perspective!  Thanks so much   Tre Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted March 29, 2012 Share #10 Â Posted March 29, 2012 400 wet&dry sandpaper will fix it all up! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Printmaker Posted March 29, 2012 Share #11  Posted March 29, 2012 I would get in touch with one of the well known Leica technicians or Leica CS and have them evaluate the lens, find out if it can be cleaned and adjusted, and what the cost would be. Good luck.  Can you recommend one in the states? I have an old TeleEle with a rear element in need of a doctor.  Thanks Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 29, 2012 Share #12  Posted March 29, 2012 Can you recommend one in the states? I have an old TeleEle with a rear element in need of a doctor. Thanks Tom   Sure, http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-blog/leica-repair-specialists/ I would start with Don Goldberg and go down the list. In my experience Don responds well to email. He lives in Oregon, Wisconsin, so he is on CDT.  For your lens as described I would ask for a repair estimate. If it can be repaired at a reasonable cost, I would ask for a repair and a CLA.  Good luck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted March 30, 2012 Share #13  Posted March 30, 2012 This is haze:  My 1932 Leitz 7.3cm ƒ1.9 Hektor came from Mexico in pretty bad shape. The focus mount was tight frozen with likely the first fit of grease from the factory, the front element was grimy and dirty on the outside, the second and third element had pretty bad haze, the aperture mechanism was rough and gritty. Beware, the hazy elements had a thick milky white shade to them, shining a flashlight through them would look like a candle light behind frozen glass.  These were shots wide open with the lens, as it arrived: Hektor 7.3cm ƒ1.9 *1932 by teknopunk.com, on Flickr  Hektor 7.3cm ƒ1.9 *1932 by teknopunk.com, on Flickr  After I took the lens apart, cleaning the elements from haze, cleaning and re-lubing the mechanics and then (the most difficult part), adjust the lens for wide open use from close focus to infinity on digital Leica M, the images looked like this:  expo is over by teknopunk.com, on Flickr  7.3cm f1.9 - girl watching man by teknopunk.com, on Flickr  The front element didn't clean entirely, while the element in the rear group closest to the aperture has a loss of anti reflective coating, leading to an overall lower contrast, than normal with this lens. What should be apparent is, that with a lens with really bad haze, you will loose contrast, bright image elements tend to "glow" (look at the white shirts) and the lens will loose a lot of light obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted April 3, 2012 Share #14 Â Posted April 3, 2012 I then shot a second round of tests with it and I could not see any difference at all between the first negs. and the second. This is with Tri-X. Â Perhaps Tri-X explains much of this: a contrasty film made up for the loss of contrast of your lens due to haze. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted April 4, 2012 Share #15 Â Posted April 4, 2012 This is haze:Â Â Just goes to show that the tools are less important than the person using them. When a photographer such as menos understands the limits and characteristics of his equipment it is possible to exploit those "issues" and use them to his advantage. Â Bravo Dirk, for showing us some beautiful images... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted April 4, 2012 Share #16 Â Posted April 4, 2012 Perhaps Tri-X explains much of this: a contrasty film made up for the loss of contrast of your lens due to haze. Â But surely it would still show the difference between the before and after images, if there was any noticeable effect? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted April 4, 2012 Share #17 Â Posted April 4, 2012 Bravo Dirk, for showing us some beautiful images... +1 I actually like the hazy ones... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.