On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 10:14:54AM +1000, Vaughan Bromfield wrote:
> Folks
>
> I dug out my big black OM System Lens Handbook last night. It is the
> October 1985 edition (marked C24E-Oct.1985 in the back) and has the 100
> f2, 180 f2, 250 f2 and 350 f2.8 lenses but not the 90 f2 macro.
>
> Zuiko 200mm f4
> Not specified as being multicoated in the book, nor is multicoating
> mentioned in the text (page 148).
Funny, it is marked as as one of the first lenses with MC in earlyer tables.
Maybe it also was one of the first MC-lenses , which aren`t marked anymore.
>
>
> We know how good many of these mentioned lenses are -- the 200mm f4 lens
> gets a good test report in particular and the 1.4X is a gem -- despite
> the fact that they are not necessarily "multicoated." I take this as
> indication that Olumpus really knew what it was doing with lens design
> and didn't just throw all the elements into the coating pot just because
> mc was trendy at the time. The quote "multicoated to minimise
> alterations in color balance" indicates to me that mc is more than just
> reducing flare and internal reflections.
Sure MC is more difficult, I know that a Leica engineer said in an Interview,
That the benefit of MC depends on the type of glass. On High diffraction
elements,
MC is useless. So Leitz gives no indication about
coating all the time and says: All ouer lenses are fully-coated. But MC is
only used when there is a benefit.
Hope Oly did it the same way.
Frieder Faig
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|