Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
on 11/2/00 9:10 am, Mike Johnston at michaeljohnston@ameritech.net wrote:
> Marc Small: >>>Anything severe enough to break the front
> element will shatter a filter and still trash the front element. Leica
> glass is TOUGH. The company recommends NOT using filters save for
> optical
> effects.<<<
>
> I second this. A hood is protection enough.
>
>
>>>> I began this debate on the opposite side of the spectrum, some many
> years
> back, in the early days of the LUG. Jim Brick and his cronies convinced
> me
> I was wrong. And I've not used filters, as a result, for lens
> protection
> for three or four years, now.<<<
>
> Carl Weese, on of our Contributing Editors, did the same for me in the
> early '90s. I've seldom used filters since (except on my collapsible
> Summicron, which has notoriously soft front element glass) and have
> never had any problems.
>
> Wasn't it Leica that used to demonstrate the toughness of the Summicron
> by having a Rep bear down on the front element with a piece of barbed
> wire, without leaving a mark? I think I remember seeing such a
> demonstration in the early '80s. I don't actually remember if it was
> Leica or not...
>
> Think how many used lenses you see for sale on eBay that say some
> version of, "barrel shows wear, glass perfect" (or "mint," or
> "flawless," or some such). If lens glass were really easy to scratch,
> there would be a whole heck of a lot more scratched lenses out there.
> (This doesn't apply to many early lenses, some of which were quite easy
> to scratch.)
Right on. I have the most battered, bashed-to-all-hell 35/1.4, which has
been used so much the focusing threads are slightly loose. I bought it on
ebay. This baby has suffered for twenty years, clearly, but the glass?
Not a single, not the tiniest, mark.
- --
John Brownlow
photos: http://www.pinkheadedbug.com
music: http://www.jukebox.demon.co.uk