Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Well Erwin, I wonder where you got your information. I have never seen any any official Leica publication saying the original CL 40/2's were multicoated. If you have, what is the source ? I have a letter from Minolta confirming that the CLE lenses were multicoated. In testing the Minolta CLE, Modern Photography also said the Minolta lenses were multi-coated, while commenting that the earlier 40/2 lenses "appear not to be." A close look at the CLE brochure shows a similar optical design to the original CL lenses, but the elements do not appear to be identical. Though similar, the shape of the 3rd element is different than the published cross section in the CL brochure. I readily admit I am not an optical expert, but then I regard no one as an optical expert who has not worked as a lens designer and/or has a degree or long apprenticeship in optical design with a major lens maker. Stephen Gandy Erwin Puts wrote: > The info on the Cameraquest site is not fully correct. > The Summicron-C and the Rokkor-C were both multicoated and so there is no > difference with the CLE-version. There is no improved optical formula. and I > wonder where Cameraquest got the facts for this assertion. Even if some > minor changes had been made, it is doubtful if this would have any influence > on performance. > The Rokkor-C has been made in Japan. > > Erwin