Scratched lens: Usable/salvageable?

[Horatio]

 

[BradS]

yes, totally usable...especially with an appropriate lens hood. Stuff on the front element really has little effect.
Try it, you may be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Nitroplait]

Fill the scratches with a black marker.

 

[ic-racer]

Just about anything "AF Nikkor" should be available on the used market with better looking optics. If you already own it, why not let us know how it functions!

 

[Horatio]

Just about anything "AF Nikkor" should be available on the used market with better looking optics. If you already own it, why not let us know how it functions!

Don't own it (yet) but I may make an offer.

 

[Horatio]

yes, totally usable...especially with an appropriate lens hood. Stuff on the front element really has little effect.
Try it, you may be pleasantly surprised.

Thanks.

 

[Nitroplait]

Don't own it (yet) but I may make an offer.

I wouldn't

 

[xkaes]

It depends on the lens -- of which we know nothing.

 

[4season]

You might get acceptable results if you avoid pointing it towards bright sources of light and use larger apertures, but I wouldn't buy it.

 

[Ian Grant]

yes, totally usable...especially with an appropriate lens hood. Stuff on the front element really has little effect.
Try it, you may be pleasantly surprised.

If the OP owned it maybe, but why buy a pig in a poke.

Ian

 

[Don_ih]

That photo could be either flattering or unflattering. If flattering, then the scratches are worse than what you see. It looks like scuffing across the centre, with lots of smaller scratches around it - like something smashed a filter that was on it and then ground it into it. That will lower contrast. Anything shining in the image will look furry (picture a furry shiny car in the sun).

 

[Horatio]

You might get acceptable results if you avoid pointing it towards bright sources of light and use larger apertures, but I wouldn't buy it.

It would be for portraiture, wide open.

 

[Huss]

Don't own it (yet) but I may make an offer.

If you had it, use it. If you don’t own it, why on earth would you consider this? there are a bazillion Nikon/Nikon mount lenses out there for pennies on the dollar.
So what if it is cheap? Treat yourself to something decent, you are worth it.

 

[Horatio]

If you had it, use it. If you don’t own it, why on earth would you consider this? there are a bazillion Nikon/Nikon mount lenses out there for pennies on the dollar.
So what if it is cheap? Treat yourself to something decent, you are worth it.

Now that is advice that’s hard to argue against.

 

[Helge]

I'm always amazed that people manage to get scratches. Let alone "scraped it along the sidewalk" scratches like that.
With a filter, that any sane person has on, and shade and cap on, no one should ever get scratches.
Cleaning marks shouldn't be possible either, because of course you blow first, then brush gently and then wipe very gently with a piece of soft cloth that has been stored in a clean location, lightly moistened with alcohol (or for older glass demineralised water).
But this sure as hell isn't cleaning marks.
Don't buy unless it's really, really cheap (like $20). You'll always be wondering how much better it could look, and you can't be sure how an owner who allowed this to happen has otherwise treated this lens.

 

[Huss]

I'm always amazed that people manage to get scratches. Let alone "scraped it along the sidewalk" scratches like that.
With a filter, that any sane person has on, and shade and cap on, no one should ever get scratches.
Cleaning marks shouldn't be possible either, because of course you blow first, then brush gently and then wipe very gently with a piece of soft cloth that has been stored in a clean location, lightly moistened with alcohol (or for older glass demineralised water).
But this sure as hell isn't cleaning marks.
Don't buy unless it's really, really cheap (like $20). You'll always be wondering how much better it could look, and you can't be sure how an owner who allowed this to happen has otherwise treated this lens.

$20 is about $20 too much. Put that $20 into getting a better lens.

 

[Helge]

$20 is about $20 too much. Put that $20 into getting a better lens.

I tend to agree. You might argue for it as an "art lens"?
I'd use the money on film though.

 

[Horatio]

$20 is about $20 too much. Put that $20 into getting a better lens.

 

[Horatio]

Could be battle scars from someplace exotic.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm always amazed that people manage to get scratches. Let alone "scraped it along the sidewalk" scratches like that.
With a filter, that any sane person has on, and shade and cap on, no one should ever get scratches.
Cleaning marks shouldn't be possible either, because of course you blow first, then brush gently and then wipe very gently with a piece of soft cloth that has been stored in a clean location, lightly moistened with alcohol (or for older glass demineralised water).
But this sure as hell isn't cleaning marks.
Don't buy unless it's really, really cheap (like $20). You'll always be wondering how much better it could look, and you can't be sure how an owner who allowed this to happen has otherwise treated this lens.

I too always put a UV or Skylight filter on all my lenses as a safety precaution.

 

[Helge]

I too always put a UV or Skylight filter on all my lenses as a safety precaution.

You’re a good boy.

 

[Helge]

Hilarious.

 

[Helge]

Could be battle scars from someplace exotic.

Exotic or not, it’s still stupid. I’d be embarrassed to sell it.

 

[BradS]

Perfect is so boring!
Imagine if a YouTube influencer with 250k subscribers did video where this scratched up lens was used to make some photos...It wouldn't matter what the results were. It would be more interesting and generate more views and ad revenue than if the same video were made with a perfect example of the same lens.

 

[Don_ih]

Perfect is so boring!
Imagine if a YouTube influencer with 250k subscribers did video where this scratched up lens was used to make some photos...It wouldn't matter what the results were it would be way more interesting and generate more views and ad revenue than if the same video was made with a perfect example of the same lens.

That all depends on the presenter and the video itself. The creator is what makes a video interesting - not the content.