Bill_de Loc: US

The Nikon ones come in the same quantities as the Zeiss. In fact they come in the same boxes with different labels. Just look at page one of this thread.

--

Aldente

===========

If I understand the question correctly, then "embedding" is a process, that filter manufacturers like British "FORMATT-Hitech" have created and I happened to own one.
Regular process for GNDs, for example, would be to "paint" (spray) the outside surface with a rubber-like substance.
Firecrest, on the other side, uses a technique similar to "gold-plating", where they control the distribution and the density of "dye" particles ELECTRONICALLY over the entire area of the filter to give it the most transparent light transmission, that just adds "darkness" without adding or affecting the overall color of the image.

(Download)

waterford Loc: Perth West Australia

My optician told me not to use isopropyl alcohol even on my spectacles as it would remove the coatings and void any lens warranties so I definitely wouldn't use them on camera lenses

BartHx

This is talking about creating filters, not lenses. Those are two different subjects. Hopefully, the surfaces of a filter are parallel and at right angles to the majority of incoming light. Refraction, surface reflection, and the resulting flare are not a significant issue when the light is hitting the glass at a ninety degree angle. Lenses, on the other hand, intersect the incoming light at a right angle only in their center. Anywhere else on the lens, refraction and reflections can be an issue.

latebloomer Loc: Topeka, KS

At Sam's Club you can get a box of 225 Zeiss Lens Wipes for about $20.

Bill_de Loc: US

Or $8.86 ???

https://www.samsclub.com/sams/zeiss-lens-wipes-225-lens-wipes-225-ct/prod21042662.ip?&source=ifpla&CAWELAID=730010300001302936&pid=_CSE_Google_PLA_1013571976&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=266139148922&wl4=pla-295448887173&wl5=9007501&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=1247713&wl11=online&wl12=81583&wl13=&wl15=56248233258&wl17=1o2&veh=sem&source=ifpla

srt101fan

Can someone please tell me what the practical effect is of improper and careless lens cleaning? If the surface coating has been damaged, is this evident to the folks at places like Adorama or B&H that rate used lenses?

How do the people that evaluate used lenses for resale know that the previous owners didn't clean them with turpentine? Are there obvious visual clues?

I don't mean to hijack this thread and, if appropriate, I'll gladly ask these questions under a new topic.

latebloomer Loc: Topeka, KS

I don't know about the price for online. I have only bought them at the store. I am guessing Costco might have them.

Red Sky At Night

Thanks for this Bill. I just ordered both.

BartHx

You ask a good question and the precise answer is . . . it all depends.

The most reliable way to judge a lens would be to compare its performance with a know undamaged duplicate lens under the conditions you are likely to use it most. It is possible that a lens could have some damage to its coatings and still do a good job under some particular conditions. Unfortunately, this is not an extremely practical approach.

Now to a more practical approach:
--The first thing I look at in acquiring a used lens is the overall, general condition of the lens. If the impression of the lens is that it has had excessive use or careless handling, it is likely that the glass has not been treated any better. I had the good fortune of working briefly under Ansel Adams. While his lenses were obviously well used, every one of them appeared to be essentially brand new.
--When viewed at an angle, if the lens looks scratched, clouded, or dull it has serious damage and should be avoided.
--In some cases, even if the glass itself is not scratched, it is sometimes possible to see where the coating(s) is/are missing from the lens when you look at the lens surface at an angle. I have one lens which I bought used where this is the case. However, since the glass, itself, is undamaged and the damage to the coatings is very near the center of the lens where the need for correction is least, the lens still works just fine. Since the damage is on the rear element of the lens, I expect it was caused by the lens being put down carelessly when changing lenses. Be sure to put a rear lens cap on any lens before putting it down on that end.
--Keeping in mind that lens coatings are each only a few molecules thick and intended to cause a narrow range of light frequencies to be reflected back one-half wavelength out of phase, they effectively subtract a narrow color range from white light being reflected from the lens element. This tends to give the light reflected from the surface of the lens an apparent color cast. This tends to be most noticeable when viewed at an angle to the surface. While I have forgotten what they are, there are some rules of thumb that indicate the number of coating layers based on the apparent color cast. I expect someone here will be able to fill you in on what those are. If someone has spent too much time or put too much effort into cleaning a lens so as to partially thin or remove the top coating layer by friction, it is possible that you could see some unevenness in the color cast or, in an extreme case, more than one color cast over different areas of the lens.

I expect there are many more ways to detect damage to the coatings on a lens, but these have been adequate to serve my needs.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

My good friend, and ex business partner used to clean his lenses with his shirt, paper towels, and I've even seen him do it with newspaper. One day, at a wedding, he asked if he could use my wide angle lens, so he gave me his 24-70. I could literally see scratched off areas around the center and rainbows of color where layers had been stripped off the lens. He would always turn in nice sharp images, but, there was a lot of ghosting, flares, and other odd color shifts as well as horrible chromatic abhoration in a lot of his photos, especially outdoor shots. Scratching a lens won't give you a noticeable scratch on the photo, it doesn't make nearly as much problem as a greasy fingerprint, or a spot on a sensor. Remove the coatings, and you will start to see some weird issues popping up depending on the quality and direction of light, and you won't be able to control it.

srt101fan

Thanks BartHx, good comments. I am considering buying a used lens and, thinking about cleaning damage a previous owner might have caused, I started to wonder how you could tell.

srt101fan

Thanks for your response bkyser. You paint a grim picture but it is helpful in understanding what happens to a lens that's poorly cared for!

BartHx

Just WOW!!!

There's a lot of frugal New England blood in my family tree. I was raised to buy the best quality tools I can afford (and, if necessary, wait until I have saved enough to get the quality I want) and then take care of them. Now that I am an antique, I may not have the latest and greatest of everything, but the tools I have for the things I love to do are high quality and reliable. For photography, I have added Nikon digital gear, but I still love to use film since my film gear and darkroom equipment will still reliably do everything I ask it to. I fell in love with medium format long ago and my Mamiya 645's and Hasselblad 500 cm work as well as they did new because they have been pampered and maintained. My Nikkormat FtN will probably last forever because it's built like a tank. I spent several hours today maintaining and fine tuning my bandsaw. It's just so much more fun when you don't have to fight your tools.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Wouldn't suprise me if they were made by the same outfit.