[rollei_list] Re: Whiteface T with Xenar question
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 22:12:05 -0800
OK. So all the fancy wording still means exactly what I said. The coatings
of the 70s were better than the coatings in the 50s. Fair enough?
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter K.
> To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 2:59 PM
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Whiteface T with Xenar question
>
>
> You misread. What I meant was better coatings than they, JSK that is, had
> in previous decades. The 50s coatings on Xenotars were horribly soft. Much
> softer than those on Zeiss lenses. Not sure why, but since coatings were
> designed for specific use perhaps their formula was not up to par until
> years later.
>
> Peter K
>
> There is a great deal more to a coating than the "formula". The method
> of deposition and baking in vacuo is of considerable importance in making
> the coating hard and for its adherance to the glass. I have no idea what
> Schneider's practice was but I have certainly seen Schneider lenses where
> the coating appears to have rubbed off in spots.
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in
> the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
--
Peter K
Ó¿Õ¬
Other related posts:
