Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,752   Posts: 1,515,904   Online: 1095
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    78

    collecting uncoated vs coated lens

    I have noticed most people spend a lot more money on vintage or collectable muti coated lens is this wise? I was thinking how good of a long term investment can a muticoated lens be? I mean after a number of years most lenes will be aflected with haze or fungus destroying coating's which a newer lens would base the design on the number of air spaces and delicate coating's making a modern lens worthless after time has its way with it. I know a uncoated lens can be etched by fugus but I hardly ever see this. So do you think if you used a hood and filter and did not shoot towards the sun the results would be so poor. I have a leica summicron screwmount the coating has worn off no where to recoat that I know of. Maybe it would be better to collect cheap uncoated lenes what do you think?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    78
    I'm sorry cheaper not cheap uncoated lens

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by randy6 View Post
    I have noticed most people spend a lot more money on vintage or collectable muti coated lens is this wise? I was thinking how good of a long term investment can a muticoated lens be? I mean after a number of years most lenes will be aflected with haze or fungus destroying coating's which a newer lens would base the design on the number of air spaces and delicate coating's making a modern lens worthless after time has its way with it. I know a uncoated lens can be etched by fugus but I hardly ever see this. So do you think if you used a hood and filter and did not shoot towards the sun the results would be so poor. I have a leica summicron screwmount the coating has worn off no where to recoat that I know of. Maybe it would be better to collect cheap uncoated lenes what do you think?
    That's nonsense.

    A lens that is properly cared for will not get fungus. In addition, many lenses that are "diagnosed" with "fungus" have other issues such as lubricant haze, separation, or the blacking on the edges lifting up (Schneideritus). The best way to avoid fungus is to keep the lenses clean - no dirt equals no food, ergo no fungus. Fugus does not "eat" glass or coating.

    A lens such as a double Gauss type with 8 air-glass surfaces, six of then internal, is a flare machine. Lubricant haze can and does build up over time, this is exacerbated by high temperatures and misguided efforts to clean/lube shutters (if the lens is mounted in a shutter). Just get coated lenses and take care of them, you'll have no problems.

  4. #4
    Two23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    282
    I prefer uncoated lense. They have a unique, softer look. The only coated lenses I have collected are three 1940s vintage, for my Leica IIIc. Otherwise, I'm really into pre-war lenses. (That's Civil War, btw.)


    Kent in SD

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    78
    For Von hoegh
    Looking at this ebay item ending today 121115964029 the contax f1.5 looks to be in bad shape would this lens be repairable? I have a f2 sonnar the rear element looked to have some fungus I sent it in to be cleaned the repairman he told me the coating was no longer any good.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    78
    I do like the "perceived" soft look from an uncoated lens as well actually an uncoated is quite sharp
    Last edited by randy6; 05-31-2013 at 12:23 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by randy6 View Post
    For Von hoegh
    Looking at this ebay item ending today 121115964029 the contax f1.5 looks to be in bad shape would this lens be repairable? I have a f2 sonnar the rear element looked to have some fungus I sent it in to be cleaned the repairman he told me the coating was no longer any good.
    That lens looks like a disaster. Yes, it could be recoated/recemented (I cannot really tell what it's issues are), this would probably cost about as much as two or three (or more...) such lenses in good condition. Buying lenses with problems and having them repaired is a very expensive proposition, these lenses aren't exactly rare.

    Where are you sending your lenses? Does your repairman have knowledge and experience?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    78
    No a sonnar f1.5 is not the rarest I can find them under$100 sometimes but that one is a disaster. Repair people I've used several over the years 2 of which have very expensive reputations I don't want to condem any repair people in this forum. Who would be your suggest? So if I buy the latest greatest version of a leica M mount I should have no worries 50 years from now if I make it the long?

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    78
    Who recoat's lenes?

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Hartford, Connecticut USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    384
    Google Photography on Bald Mountain, in Colorado. They will repolish and recoat lenses -- not cheap but it could be worth it.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin