Scratch on lens

[Jim]

I appreciate the input thus far. I am "considering" a lens that has a scratch on the glass. I am still learning before I start investing $1500 - $2000 in "L" lenses. This is a 28-135 IS for a couple of hundred instead of $400. I know when one takes a picture through a windshield or screen the focal is beyond and does not show in the final picture. I want to know what effect the scratch will have? Thanks

[neuroanatomist]

I'd avoid a scratched lens. Even though you will be able to 'focus through' the scratch, it will cause increased flare and ghosting, and thus a decrease in image quality (IQ) in some shots.


I would suggest that instead of a damaged lens, especially one that has a variable aperture and just 'ok' image quality, you consider a prime lens with a faster aperture and better IQ - such as the EF 50mm f/1.8 II (cheap build, good IQ), the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, or the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM lenses.

[peety3]

This is a 28-135 IS for a couple of hundred instead of $400.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Let me change that quote for you: "This is a 28-135 for a couple of hundred instead of $200." They may have a retail price of $400, but no sane individual has paid $400 for that lens since the release of the 40D. The lens has been a kit lens, with a $200 price difference, in kits since 8/07. You could go stand outside any camera store (well, any camera store that has the likelihood of selling a Canon 50D or maybe a few other models in the time you'd like) with a sign that says "will buy your brand new 28-135 kit lens for $200" and you'll get a taker.


There's no way that a scratched 28-135 for $200 is a deal. $75, sure. $125, maybe.

[HiFiGuy1]

As the <span style="text-decoration: line-through;"]proud owner of a 28-135 kit lens, I must concur with Peety. It is certainly not terrible, and it has a very useful range, but mine is flawless and I'll gladly sell it to you today for $200. Seriously, if you want it, let me know. I am also sort of compulsive with my gear, and it is as if it hasn't been used. Front and rear caps, too.

[Jim]

As the <span style="text-decoration: line-through;"]proud owner of a 28-135 kit lens, I must concur with Peety. It is certainly not terrible, and it has a very useful range, but mine is flawless and I'll gladly sell it to you today for $200. Seriously, if you want it, let me know. I am also sort of compulsive with my gear, and it is as if it hasn't been used. Front and rear caps, too.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

I really appreciate the various comments and I did read the excellent piece at LensRental.com. I was unaware that there were ever "IS" lenses used as kit lenses. If yours is in fact 28-135 IS USM lenses I might very well be in the market. Thanks. PS: The one I was considering is long gone. (from B &amp; H)

[neuroanatomist]

If yours is in fact 28-135 IS USM lenses...

Canon does not and has not ever made a 28-135mm lens without IS. So, if it's 28-135mm, it is an IS USM lens. There were several flavors of the 28-105mm lenses (with and without USM, and a Mk II for one of those), but none of them had IS.

I was unaware that there were ever "IS" lenses used as kit lenses.

<div>Yes, IS lenses are used in kits - in fact, in just about all kits sold today. The currently available Rebel kits, from the T1i down to the XS, all ship with the EF-S 18-55mm IS lens (and/or the EF-S 55-250 IS lens). Currently available xxDs and the 7D are bundled with the EF 28-135mm IS USM lens, and the 5D MkII 'kit lens' is theEF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM lens. </div>