How do scratches on the front element affect the image quality?

[mikhs1]

Hello,

I am currently looking into getting a "budget" 6x6 film camera (always wanted to try medium format).

Most affordable cameras i see on eBay are 60-70 years old, and their description says "fully working", but the lenses usually have "fungus cleaning marks", slight haze/fog, or scratches on front element (or a combination of the above).

I definitely ignore ones that have fungus, because that can grow..

Can anyone tell me what negative effects (if any) cleaning marks, haze, or scratched front element may have on the image quality.

Which one of these is most, and which is the least concerning? It's pretty much impossible to find a camera this old without at least one of these issues.

Thank you in advance.

 

[flektogon]

Well, definitely avoid lenses exhibiting haze and of course those invaded by fungus. Regarding the scratches, one or even several "distinguished" scratches should not impact the lens performance. Something else is a scratched larger lens surface. This will cause a softness of the pictures. Still might be acceptable for portraits. But such old lenses will be mostly dirty, especially their inside surfaces covered with dust. They can be cleaned and restored.

--
Regards,
Peter

 

[Overrank]

You may find that the choice of camera also makes a big difference - I had an Agfa Standard (1920s folder) that took quite sharp photos. But then it gummed up from underuse and I bought another, with a lens that was simpler / cheaper when new. Photos from this camera are noticeably less sharp than my previous Standard (tbh they’re about as good as a 35mm disposable even with a 6x9 negative).

It might be worth asking what people think are good choices for cheap MF cameras. My 6 cents is that the Voigtlander Perkeo seems to have a good reputation (although I’ll note that I’ve never used one), and the various Yashica MAT are nice and pretty cheap too (I have an LM).

 

[grsnovi]

...the Voigtlander Perkeo seems to have a good reputation

I have a Perkeo II with the 80/3.5 Color-Skopar.

I'm guessing that the folding design keeps the front element as free of scratches as possible.

The added bonus of a folder is that (with the Perkeo anyway) it will fit in your jeans pocket. And it's light (unlike the Mamiya 645 1000s).







--
Gary

Gary Smith

Explore Gary Smith’s 169 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[Ianm]

My experience has been that most common front element cleaning marks, scratches etc have surprisingly little impact on image quality. If you inspect any vintage lens with a bright light you'll always see dust and small scratches that are the inevitable evidence of 60-70 years of use.

However, like you I would avoid lenses with haze or fungus. I have a Yashica Mat with a small patch of haze on the rear element. While it doesn't affect most images, it is visible on shots into light where it shows up as a patch of reduced contrast, a bit like flare.

Having said all that, I do avoid lenses with very visible front element scratches, but that's more from a point of view of wanting my lenses to be beautiful to look at, as well as taking good images!

If you're looking for a budget 6x6 camera to try medium format then why not start with a cheap folding camera. At the extreme I bought a Zeiss Nettar on ebay for £15 that takes great images. You won't get an exposure meter, any focusing aids, or much of a viewfinder, but they're fun and compact.

The next step up might be one of the cheaper TLRs. Overrank mentioned a Yashica Mat, but also look out for a Minolta Autocord. I wouldn't go for anything more expensive than those until you know you're happy with the TLR experience. While they take wonderful images, I find the waist level finder experience frustrating.

Good luck, and post some of your medium format images here for us to admire!

Ian.

 

[Bob Janes]

Hello,

I am currently looking into getting a "budget" 6x6 film camera (always wanted to try medium format).

Most affordable cameras i see on eBay are 60-70 years old, and their description says "fully working", but the lenses usually have "fungus cleaning marks", slight haze/fog, or scratches on front element (or a combination of the above).

I definitely ignore ones that have fungus, because that can grow..

Can anyone tell me what negative effects (if any) cleaning marks, haze, or scratched front element may have on the image quality.

Which one of these is most, and which is the least concerning? It's pretty much impossible to find a camera this old without at least one of these issues.

Thank you in advance.

A single deep scratch or even a gouge is not going to have much of an effect on the final image. Multiple marks will have more of an effect, but you would be surprised how well the image forms. In general, anything that causes light to bounce around rather than being drawn to a focus will lessen contrast and increase the chance of flare - but you might not notice in a lot of situations.

Very often what people think is fungus is actually element separation - the bonus being that element separation doesn't spread to other lenses.

 

[Tomm111]

Light cleaning scratches don't make much of a difference, heavy scratches do, but if there is one that is probably OK. Internal haze and fungus are generally something to stay away from unless you really want camera x and you are prepared to spend the money for a CLA. My 1953 Rollei was developing some internal haze and I had the camera CLAd and it has been great in the 3 years since I had it done, but I already had the camera.

I don't know much about folders, other than the Zeiss Super Ikonta, which I have almost purchased a couple of times, but the cameras always had a problem that put me off. TLRs are very good ways to start, the best Yashica Mats were the 124gs, but they have gone way up in price. Minolta Autocords are also very good but a little older, Rolleicords also deserve consideration, as do Tessar lens Rolleiflexes, but they will be a little more money. Good luck on your search.