Scratch front SMC-A 35-105


bjolester

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 17:32
I received a SMC-A 35-105 1:3.5 lens today that I purchased from a UK second-hand photo equipment shop last week. The lens has some scratches on the front element, otherwise it seems to be in a very good condition. I paid GBP 69 for the lens, and it was graded E+

How do the scratches affect photo quality?

Bjorn






Bjørn

PPG
Flickr

Mike-P

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 17:45
I doubt that they would make much difference (if any) to your pictures but I certainly wouldn't be describing that as E+ condition. Ffordes by any chance?
No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr
Last Edited by Mike-P on 31/05/2010 - 17:46

Helpful

Mannesty

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 17:51
You might get some flare-like artefacts if taking images towards the sun, but that can mostly be sorted by putting a hood on it.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

bjolester

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 18:56
Thank you for your responses to my question! Yes, the lens was purchased at Ffordes (E+, Condition: Signs of use ).

stevo

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 19:13
Mike-P wrote:
I certainly wouldn't be describing that as E+ condition. Ffordes by any chance?

Are Ffordes known for misleading descriptions?

I'd be a bit annoyed if I bought an E+ lens to find it had scratches on, but they don't look like they're going to make much difference to image quality. And £69 for the A 35-105 is a bit of a bargain. It's an excellent lens.

Mike-P

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 19:22
stevo wrote:

Are Ffordes known for misleading descriptions?


Not that I know of, I was just interested as they are the only company I know of that uses that scale for condition of lenses. £69 is a very good price from a dealer, I advertised mine on here for £100 and had a few people wanting it (decided to keep it in the end).
No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr
Last Edited by Mike-P on 31/05/2010 - 19:22

JonSchick

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 19:49
If it makes you feel any better, I recently purchased one for £100 and thought it was worth every penny and then some. It's a great lens, and now sits on my camera as standard lens unless I need to use something else.

hefty1

Link Posted 31/05/2010 - 23:37
That looks very much like the one I sold to someone in Liverpool on eBay a couple of months back - is the serial number 5793755 by any chance? If so the scratches came from the owner prior to me dropping it with a UV filter on and that's from the shards of glass. If it's any consolation I tested it before selling it and found the results perfectly good, but you may find some ghosting if you point it directly into the sun.

Even if it's not the same one (and it really does look it!) you'll probably have the same end result and that's still a good dealer price as Mike says.

I found it made my K10D a bit front heavy but then I don't use a grip - nice IQ though.
Joining the Q

gartmore

Link Posted 01/06/2010 - 10:29
I was just about to say that those marks looked like they had been inflicted by a so-called protection filter
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -

Mannesty

Link Posted 01/06/2010 - 11:37
gartmore wrote:
I was just about to say that those marks looked like they had been inflicted by a so-called protection filter

That's one of the reasons I don't use them.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

whelmed

Link Posted 01/06/2010 - 15:52
At the very least this thread has made me very sceptical of ever buying from Ffordes!! That's EX+? If there are any reps from Ffordes on here right now, please speak up now or forever hold your piece.
K-5; Siggy 10-20 f4, 30mm f1.4, 18-50mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8; Tammy 400mm f4, 500mm f8

ISO

Link Posted 01/06/2010 - 17:14
I think you may have been unlucky - as people imply the price was right but the E+ wrong. Over some time I have bought a Tokina ATX 28/70 2.8 a Pentax SMC FA 100 Macro 2.8 and a Tammy 500 Mirror from them without any problems.

bjolester

Link Posted 01/06/2010 - 19:20
hefty1 wrote:
That looks very much like the one I sold to someone in Liverpool on eBay a couple of months back - is the serial number 5793755 by any chance? If so the scratches came from the owner prior to me dropping it with a UV filter on and that's from the shards of glass. If it's any consolation I tested it before selling it and found the results perfectly good, but you may find some ghosting if you point it directly into the sun.

The serial number on my lens is 5275283, so it is not the one you sold.

I have taken some pictures today, to check out the lens. On the first photo I pointed the camera towards the sun, do the artifacts/dots come from the scratches? The second photo just shows how good colours the lens produces.


K20D, Iso 100, F8.0, 1/2000



K20D, Iso 100, F8.0, 1/500


Bjørn

PPG
Flickr

Mannesty

Link Posted 01/06/2010 - 20:17
I think if you are happy with the amount you paid for the lens, and based on image #2, I'd say it was worth keeping.

After all, how many times are you going to take shots into the sun with this lens? I almost never do, it's dangerous for a start, so don't do it.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

beginner

Link Posted 01/06/2010 - 20:50
They operate a 7 day return option!....I have found them very good in the past,if you are not happy with the condition,just send it back!.....Ken
K20D...ist DS ,DA18/55,DA16/45.DA* 50/135,"A"1.7 50MM..."A" 70/210..M 50mm f2...Tamron 90mm macro,28/300 Tamron,200/500 Tamron 6.9....A Pentax DA*300... Sigma10/20,FA31mm 1.8 Ltd*********,FA 77mm Ltd!
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.