evil scratches vs. benign cleaning mark?

Ish · 07-13-2004

First, thanks to everyone who posted a bit of advice to my last thread.

For my first lens, I ended up going for a new M-Hexanon 50. I checked out a good number of used lenses. It was pretty easy to notice fogging or weird moldy things floating around inside them, but to my untrained eye, I couldn't tell if some of the marks I saw were just cleaning marks, or if they were something that would really wreck image quality. I was probably too conservative in choosing a lens, and decided to play it safe with a new one.

If anyone has any hints on how to tell the difference between the two, it'd be really helpful. In a month or so (after I get a bit more used to the body, and in fact, the whole rangefinder experience), I'd like to grab a used 35 and 90, to fill in my most-often-used focal lengths.

Thanks again for the advice. I'll post a few of the least aestheically offensive pics from my first few rolls as soon as I manage to wrestle my scanner into submission.

jdos2 · 07-14-2004

MPEX showed me how to tell the difference between scratches and cleaning marks- look through the back of the lens at a low contrast target from a couple inches away. If you can see the marks, they are fully scratches. If you can't, the coating is suffering only cleaning marks.