Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/04/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It might be helpful to us if you would elaborate on exactly how you made the determination that the lens coating was flawed. Also, if the flaws were not glaring, did it take much convincing of the people at BandH to see the defects? Thanks. Mark Berkley - ---------- > From: Charles E. Dunlap <cdunlap@rupture.ucsc.edu> > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: Lens Variability > Date: Sunday, April 06, 1997 4:00 PM > > >All, > > > >A question: how much does lens performance vary from sample to sample? > > I've noticed variability in the coatings on recent 90/2.8 lenses from > Solms. I sent two back to B+H before I got one that did not have flaws. If > quality control is sometimes lax on coating inspections it might also be > lax on lens element alignment or grinding. Leica isn't perfect. The > machining and assembly is only as accurate as the workers make it, and > sometimes they have a bad day. > > -Charlie > > -------------------------------------------- > Charles E. Dunlap > Earth Sciences Deptartment > University of California > Santa Cruz, CA 95064 > Tel.: (408) 459-5228 Fax.: (408) 459-3074 > -------------------------------------------- >