Looks like it could be an edge separation - may be stable or not and
'may' not affect performance unless there is a highlight in that
quarter when it could flare. In other words - won't affect performance
in most cases but when it does, it really will. Often, some marks on
the margin are the result of excess glue (white edge spots) or matt
black paint flaking off the outside or edges of the front lens group
and that is insignificant in most cases. Also, if it is close to the
top of the lens, it will tend to be in an area normally masked off by
the 35mm frame.
Given the guarantee, it might be worth the risk. The 16 is NICE lens!
Actually, it is amazing what marks and damage do NOT have an effect on
the image in most circumstances. I've had lenses with bad front
scratches which had no discernable effect if blacked in to reduce
flare. But not on a fish, where the front element surface can be
actually inside the depth of field when close focussing or stopping
down!
AndrewF
On 19/10/2004, at 6:24 PM, Piers Hemy wrote:
> www.hemy.me.uk/Miscellany/16_3,5.jpg
>
> While it doesn't quite match the description Gord gave, I think the
> problem
> is analogous to Gord's; is likely unrepairable short of a replacement
> front
> group; is likely to be reflected in the closing price; and is probably
> to be
> lived with. Olympususa has a better shape example (minus the front
> cap) for
> USD700. You make your choice and you pay your money.
>
> Piers
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|