Question regarding lens condition (Leica 35mm Summicron v4)

[vancevance]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just bought a 35mm summicron v4 off of ebay. Upon inspecting the lens, the rear element had these lines (that according to the seller's post and upon speaking with him, is cleaning marks) and a spectral band. Took a test picture of a white paper and noticed some banding on the top right corner from f11 to the smallest aperture (Tried it on an m240 and m9 monochrom. Both yielded the same result). 

Is this lens separation/etc and how bad is it? 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[andybarton]

If you can see this damage in your test shots, it’s bad. 

What is the return policy of the eBay seller?

[hansvons]

Return it.

I’d never buy a lens with scratches on the rear lens, front lens, or what they call "cleaning marks", dust in the housing, oil on the aperture blades or even fungus or general haze. The "vintage-ness" isn't worth buying a lens that is just an old, worn-out lens. 

A collector might think differently but when this lens is meant to see daily use, a mint condition of the optics is advisable. 

[TomB_tx]

The "spectral band" looks like an interference pattern between two slightly separated glass surfaces. 

[Danner]

52 minutes ago, TomB_tx said:

The "spectral band" looks like an interference pattern between two slightly separated glass surfaces. 

Agree.  Based on the image, it looks like lens separation.  I'd demand my money back.

Edited January 13, 2024 by Danner

[pgk]

That's Newton's rings. Its caused by light interference between two glass surfaces with a marginal air gap and as such it indicates marginal separation in the rear group as a result of cement failure. This is usually caused by shock and strongly suggests that the lens has been dropped. Whilst it is repairable (I've had it done) finding someone prepared to do it is far from easy (I was lucky because I knew someone working in an optical business, but they only did it as a favour!). Send it back as damaged because, for all intents and purposes, it is unrepairable. It will not perform as well as it should with such damage

Edited January 13, 2024 by pgk
clarity

[gaheris]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The white lines I wouldn't call cleaning marks, which shouldn't be easily visible without shining a light through the lens. Those are meant to be 'traces of lens being cleaned by wiping' left on the coating of a lens element. Bit naughty for the seller to call this 'cleaning marks', I think. 

The separation on the other hand looks quite bad and you should return this lens. 

[rtai]

If the seller mainly sold cameras and lenses and can be said to be experienced then the cleaning mark explanation was dishonest.

[Cattoo]

From eBay’s return policy…

If the item you received doesn't match the listing, or if it arrived faulty or damaged, you can return it even if the seller's returns policy says they don't accept returns.