Skip to main content

Scratched Vs Unscratched lens

So, i got a Nikkor 28 f/2.8 AIS for £5. What a deal! Well not really - the lens is full of scratches and internal dust. But I imagine, getting a lens for £5 is a good deal anyway. But how does it perform with all these scratches? Is it up to any good? There is one way to find out.
My very unscientific test is thought out like this: I will shoot some pictures with the scratched and destroyed 28 f/2.8 AIS and i will shoot the same ones with the immaculate Nikkor 28-70 and compare the pictures. I developed the film - a FOMA 200 - in Rodinal 1:50 and scan the negatives with an old Canoscan 8600F at 4.800 dpi and see which lens performs better. Of course, a 28 AIS performs much better than the Nikkor Zoom, although the 28-70 is a very well respected zoom lens. I shot four sets of pictures at apertures f/4, /5.6 and f/8.
No unsharp mask or any adjustment done, all settings on the scanner have been set to default. These are the scans straight out of the scanner.

Here are the results:

 This picture is taken on f/4. Here is a detail of this picture.
Now, here is another picture. This one is taken at f/5.6 and the sun is in the background, inside the frame.

And here is a detail from these pictures.
Now, next one is a picture in high contrast. Sorry about the messy background. Both pictures taken at f/5.6
And here are the details.
A few more.
Here is one taken outside with the sun just behind the subject. Any lens would suffer under these conditions. This one is taken at f/8
and here are a detailed scan of them.
Finally, the same newspaper taken in less contrasty environment. Again at f/8

These pictures are exactly the same scan details as the ones above.
 
and a scan from the bottom left corner.
 Conclusion
Nothing that we didn't know already. A scratched lens can still produce more than acceptable pictures. Yes, sure, maybe the unscratched 28 f/2.8 AIS performs much much better but for the price the scratched lenses fetch, it is too difficult to ignore. I don't suggest that you go to that auction site and buy all scratched lenses you can find - but if you come across one, dirty cheap as I did, then maybe it will be wise to buy it. These pictures show that the almost scratched to death 28 AIS performs just as good as the pristine 28-70.
Here are some pictures taken with it.





 

Comments

  1. Dan1 November 2016 at 06:37

    Thank you, this is an excellent and very useful post! I have an old Helios 44-2 that is full of dust and even a couple of bubbles yet it's still capable of amazing results.

    People get so paranoid about even very minor scratches and dust on lenses.

    Your experiments go to show that if you don't mind the lens not looking pristine, you can still get excellent results at bargain prices...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown8 May 2018 at 20:14

    Thank for this post!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown14 October 2018 at 23:52

    My 28/2.8 AIS has a central front element chip, loose/worn focus and is generally "slack".


    It is one of my sharpest and most contrasty lenses, which include 20/3.5UD, 24/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.4, etc. (all AI/S or converted).


    I love it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ronsurf20 December 2019 at 07:02

    Very useful post! I've cleaned so many lenses in my time! I never really considered dust and light scratches a problem. A lot of scratches are only in the lens blooming rather than the glass itself and look worse than they are.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Farside21 November 2021 at 09:28

    For the odd scratch, I fill it in with black marker, but a lens that has been cleaned with Bacofoil or a pot scrubber demands something better.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nikon N90s (F90x)

This is a review of the Nikon N90s which is the same as the Nikon F90X in Europe. I came across this camera while I was browsing on that big auction site for a Nikon lens for the F4s. An online retailer was selling it for £23 including postage so I thought it would be silly to ignore it. The camera is in mint condition except from a small depression on the prism that has created a scratch. Everything else is shining new! Without going into too much details about the history of this model, the early 90's where still quite difficult for the AF Nikons as they where not the fastest systems around although they were offering backward compatibility with older lenses. In 1992, Nikon released the plain F90 which was an improvement over the older F-801s but still it wasn't a match for the Canons or Minoltas of that era. The F90x came in 1995 and placed Nikon back on the AF SLR map. It was the first Nikon with an AF module which was just as good - and at times better ...
2 comments
Read more

Nikon F801s

The venerable Nikon F801s  This is a review of the Nikon F801s and it's progenitor, the F801. I've been using the F801s for a few months now and I own a plain F801 since 2017. As it is usually the case, it was an impulsive buy, it was for £0.99 with no bids online and I decided that I wanted to compare it with the old trusty F801. * Background information and history. Nikon joined the AF race quite early on in 1986 - Minolta's surprising announcement of the Dynax 7000/9000 the year before forced Nikon to release a modified version of the F301 with an AF module - the F501AF. Canon joined a year later with the first EOS camera (EOS 650) featuring a new lens mount with no backwards compatibility. Nikon's F501 used a very basic AF module with 96 CCDs  - this was eventually replaced by the "legendary" (the emphasis is mine) AM200 module (an array of 20 by 10 CCDs) which found its way in all AF Nikons - from F401 to the F4 and even the third generation ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Pentax MZ-50

Cute... This was an impulsive buy - found it for £5 and thought i could have it. It came with 2 CR-2 batteries and initial testing at the shop showed that it worked well. Anyway, the batteries alone cost more than £5. I am not sure how did Pentax experienced the 1990's. Pentax was big in the swinging and dancing 60's with the Spotmatic, did very well in the 70s with the MX and it was the LX that dominated Pentax's pro-line in the 80s. But in the 90s Pentax did not come up with any pro camera and did not introduce any exotic lenses either. The different iterations of the Z-1 were good cameras but in the same league such as the Nikon F90 or Canon EOS5. If you scroll down my blog you will find a review of the Z1 - a very good camera which I sold due to the complicated user interface.  I have to say that the photographic press was pleasantly surprised by the Z-20. I don't see a lot of them coming up online and some of the reviews I read describe it as functiona...
Post a Comment
Read more