Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Newer lens coating or haze? (UC Hexanon 28/1.8)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 1:10 pm    Post subject: Newer lens coating or haze? (UC Hexanon 28/1.8) Reply with quote

I have two copies of the Konica UC Hexanon 28/1.8

Lens #1 (to the left) has a slightly lower serial number than lens #2 (to the right). The glass on lens #1 is somehow clearer, the black metal parts inside the lens are blacker giving the impression that there is no glass between the eye and the metal. Lens #2 either has more coating or then something else is going on. Could it be haze or separation orhas Konica simply added more/newer coating on the slightly newer lens.

I have looked at 100% crops from both lenses and I can tell no difference in clarity or sharpness.



The bulbous inner element of lens #2 has a more purple coating, lens #1 is more blue/green (lens #2 to the left). The situation is the opposite when it comes to the outermost glass surface.

Lens #2 seems to be more reflective.



Last edited by Pontus on Thu Aug 20, 2015 1:37 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

WoW! Two copies of such an high regarded lens Very Happy :envy
- You just could send the "worst" one to me ans that is OK Rolling Eyes

Seriously, nothing against having the best (i.e. mint/EX++) copies of lenses but lens with some so-called "haze" may be as good too.
Of course resale VALUE is another story, but as IQ of produced photos the difference may be minimal or not visible at all.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vlousada wrote:
WoW! Two copies of such an high regarded lens Very Happy :envy
- You just could send the "worst" one to me ans that is OK Rolling Eyes

Seriously, nothing against having the best (i.e. mint/EX++) copies of lenses but lens with some so-called "haze" may be as good too.
Of course resale VALUE is another story, but as IQ of produced photos the difference may be minimal or not visible at all.


Naw, don't send it to him, he'd just waste it. Now I however... Rolling Eyes

I sincerely doubt that the variance you see has any relation to separation or any other flaw. If I had to guess I would think that both lenses received the same coating. Some slight difference in the batches of glass, the coating mix, or even the environment the different lenses have been exposed to seem more likely causes for the difference in coloring.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Flipped lens elements? Or?,

Sounds as if there are two coatings, they wanted to try coating surfaces in different sequential order. Coatings have different index of refraction, however. I.e., changing the coatings only could cause minor inaccuracies within the whole lens, which effects could cancel by the time light gets all the way through the lens.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What happens when you shine a bright inspection light through them?


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Definitely not flipped lens elements. I have tested both lenses both at mfd and at infinity and I can't tell the results apart when pixel peeping.

When I shine a light through the lenses, both are very clear and free of dust. Can't see anything wrong.

It's just that one lens seems to have more reflective green coating making the lens look less transparent when looking at the lens inners and aperture mechanism from the front (under natural light).


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

visualopsins wrote:
Sounds as if there are two coatings, they wanted to try coating surfaces in different sequential order. Coatings have different index of refraction, however. I.e., changing the coatings only could cause minor inaccuracies within the whole lens, which effects could cancel by the time light gets all the way through the lens.


This could be the case. Both lenses seem to have greenish and purple coatings. Lets say that Konica has experimented and that the different coatings are on different elements on my two lenses. If one of the coatings (the green) is more reflective it could mean that the lens with the greenish coating on the outer element would seem less transparent... Maybe.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What about light transmission?
The metering is identical?


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I can see no difference.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Konica was revising the sequence of coating layers, or transferred the reflective coating to the exterior, perhaps it was done to reduce internal reflections. That later lens is reflective as viewed from the front. Thus some light transmission is loss. But if that coating was beneath, perhaps it was reflecting more internally.

Just a hunch, try pointing both lenses at the Sun and see if they both flare the same way.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
Yes, I can see no difference.


an excellent coating today brings reflections per surface down to less than 0.5%. Even if it would be somewhat different, the difference in stops is negligible.
I however measure that with a special spectrometric setup, then once would see it and on a 300-850nm scale Wink


PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems to be an inconsistency in coated process, or a change in the coated itself from a lens to the other.

I believe when we find only one of that two lenses, any of them, nothing will call our attention.