Lens haze?

[MazG]

I bought my first used lens last week, a 35-70 2.8 non D. The lens autofocus, zoom and macro features all seem to be working as does the aperture lock (often broken in this older model). The glass is free from scratches and the lens generally appears to have been looked after even though it is older (the seller switched to the Canon system and the lens has not been used recently).

Everything about this lens is working EXCEPT there seems to be some kind of haze inside the lens. Each photograph taken has a visible haze to it evenly across the whole photo, muting the colors. It almost reminds me of a smoky room. I can see this through the viewfinder but cannot see anything inside the lens with my naked eye.

The blades appear to be clean on both sides and I have cleaned the glass at both ends so am convinced it is something inside the lens that is causing the problem. Has anyone come across anything similar? How serious is this problem? Can it be fixed and does anyone have an idea of how much it would cost to fix?

I picked up the lens quite cheap and am willing to invest a little into it if it is fixable.

--
MazG

 

[R Laing]

If you can't see anything in the lens it just might be a contrast issue.

--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“If you have something to add don’t be intimidated by the forum bullies. That way they win.”

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

If you remove the front and rear lens caps, move the lever at the back to open the aperture and look through the lens at a bright light source if there is anything inside you will see it.
--
Leonard Shepherd

Good photography has more to do with the pictures you take than the equipment you own.

 

[Bimthecat]

The newest 35-70 2.8 are flare-prone anyway.

and the newest 35-70 2.8 D has a more aggressive coating to help control the flare.

I saw an OLD non-D 35-70 2.8 and it was bad: hazy, foggy, no contrast, as you describe.

I would not buy this lens, there really is no way to make it great.

 

[MazG]

Here are the links:
Photos 1-4 indoor with haze
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087458288322450
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087458288322466
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087462583289778
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087466878257090

Photo 5 (no. 4 with auto levels)
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087466878257106

Photos 6-9 outdoor with haze
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087763231000546
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087763231000562
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087767525967874
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087771820935186

Photo 10 lots of haze but this was from the sun (I could shade the lens and it would disappear)
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034087776115902498

Photos 11-13 normal (but all with sun/light source behind me)
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034088076763613234
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034088081058580546
http://picasaweb.google.com/marina.garrison/Test/photo#5034088085353547858

Do you think this could be the glare issue? Wouldn't it be strange for it to be that noticeable indoors?

--
MazG

 

[kocho]

Does not look good. I have been complaining about this lens at 70mm but I've seen nothing like that even in its worst setting (70mm wide open close-up shot).

One factor is definitely the loss of contrast due to light hitting the front. But if you are getting these muddy stuff with the sun in your back I think there is something wrong.

Try the same shot with this and another lens and see if there is a difference. At 50mm as many of your shots are I think the lens should be excellent, provided there is no light hitting the front glass and creating stray light inside.

 

[Petruska]

We need to know what F stop, shutter speed, ISO, you used.

Many of your samples look fine to me. Post Processing should help most of them.

I have the 35-70mm D version and I need to set the camera expsoure compensation at -1.0EV to give me the contrast that I need. For some reason my lens overexposes when exposure compensation is set to 0. Try the 1.0 setting to see if things improve. I shoot raw. I use Capture NX for post processing and usually do auto levels, add a contrast of 10, and then unsharp mask of 15-25 to get great pictures from this 35-70mm.

I bought this lens used for $300 on Ebay a few months ago and it gave me excellent pictures,very sharp, great contrast and colors. Looking thorugh the lens wide open at the sky or a bright light showed an excellent clean lens. But if I shined a pen light flashlight with narrow beam from the bottom up though the lens and placed the beam at various angles I could see a spot which looked like a almost transparent water stain on an inner element. It didn't seem to affect the image quality at all but I love this lens and sent it for Nikon for a Clean, Lube, Adjustment and any repairs required.

They replaced 2 inner lens elements, total cost was $250 but I now have a very sharp well adjusted lens.

Bottom line is that I spent a total of $550 for a used repaired lens. You can buy a new one from B&H Photo for $449 with a 5 year warranty. I also could have bought another Ebay used one for $250 - 300 and sold the other one.

Most likely Nikon will class your repair as a Class C and it will cost you $250 including shipping which is a standard fee for this.