Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Lens coating
From: "Dante A. Stella" <>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 20:24:58 -0500
References: <> <>

A lot of lenses look like they're uncoated in some inner element.  Later
Soviet 1.5 look like they're not coated at all on the front element.  The
coating color is the manufacturer's choice, basically.

Dan Cardish wrote:

> If the lens "works beautifully, with no flare or ghost images", I don't
> think you have anything to worry about.
> dan c.
> At 08:02 AM 15-03-01 +0800, Dr H L Lau wrote:
> >Hello all,
> >
> >Could you please help me on this?
> >
> >I have a 50mm Summilux (no. 166xxxx) M-mount, probably made in 1959, which
> I bought used some time ago.  One day when my friend looked at this lens,
> he said it had something weird about its coating. The
> >reason he gave is that when you look at the reflected images from the lens
> surface under a lamp, the series of reflected images are coloured (which is
> normal) but one of them in the middle of the series is
> >not coloured (white if you look under a fluorescent lamp, which he said is
> abnormal and shows a coating problem or re-coating).
> >
> >The lens works beautifully, with no flare or ghost images (well, I did not
> shoot at a light source).
> >
> >Is there really a coating problem? Or is it "normal" for a Summilux of
> this vintage? I've looked into Laney, Bower and Kisselbach and could not
> find an answer.  Is this something I have to look out for when
> >buying used lenses in future?

In reply to: Message from Dan Cardish <> (Re: [Leica] Re: Lens coating)