Sonnar2
Well-known
CANON quoted in their brochures of the 50's that the black 50/1.8 was a recalculation with newly developed glass types.
Probably the 35/1.8 (developed in the same time) hazes the same way. One should keep in mind that it was the fastest 35mm in the world back in 1956, patented in most countries for newest technology, which couldn't have been tested for longevity. My has a very slight haze, it just affect picture quality when used in backlite, but there are worse ones present. The 35/2 and all LATER lenses DON'T haze this way (although they can develop the usual kind of spider web fungus, which is removable when mildly). To me it's quite obvious that CANON did a change either in glass or coating technique.
I'm not sure about the 50/1.4. My is clear as a cristal but some are sold with haze too. I would avoid them as a buyer.
Last edited:
So the Canon Glass in the late 50's is the culprit. I have cleaned two 50/1.4's (v1 and v2, going by the distance scale?), the haze was light but came off to leave a perfectly clean surface. The Black 50/1.8's did not clean up well.
The Canon 85/2 that came with a Leotax and Simlar 5cm F1.5 had been in storage for 30 years. It was very hazy and frozen up when I got it, cleaned up well. The Simlar also cleaned up well, but the focus mount had to be soaked for 3 days in lighter fluid. It was frozen stiff, but is feeling much better now.
The Canon 85/2 that came with a Leotax and Simlar 5cm F1.5 had been in storage for 30 years. It was very hazy and frozen up when I got it, cleaned up well. The Simlar also cleaned up well, but the focus mount had to be soaked for 3 days in lighter fluid. It was frozen stiff, but is feeling much better now.
Gumby
Veteran
I can handle it just fine. What makes you think that you know what I, or anyone else, can handle? Do you have ESP, or a crystal ball? I think you are projecting your own quirky personality when you refer to the "image problems" of others. I prefer to refer to what you call "image problems" as traits, desires, etc. It is much kinder that way; your value judgements are not only meaningless, but somewhat offensive.
Thanks for the well wishes... I am feeling a bit better.
Gumby
Veteran
Yes... I suppose you are right. Would you like a capsule summary? In summary, Roger seems to think that people who don't drive old pieces of junk or shoot with beat-up camera equipment have some sort of personality disorder. I made the mistake of telling John (not Roger, who I couldn't really care less about his opinions of people's personalities) that I don't buy "bargain" camera equipment and like to drive a nice, well-maintained car.
I regret having reacting to one of Roger's foolish comments... and apologize to you for having to see this message.
I regret having reacting to one of Roger's foolish comments... and apologize to you for having to see this message.
Gumby
Veteran
Now that's funny!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
(1) Of course. Doesn't everyone?
(2) And you aren't?
(3) Yes. I like precision in writing. That's how I earn a living at it.
(4) Quite unlike yours, then. EDIT: come to think of it, if they're meaningless, how are they offensive?
(5) Good. I'm glad we agree on something. Good health to you!
Tashi delek,
R.
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Gumby
Veteran
Roger, please continue this in PM if you must. Spare the others. Thanks
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Ed,
What? And give you the last word?
I'll stop now if you will. I look forward with interest to not seeing your reply.
Tashi delek,
R.
Gumby
Veteran
OK stop now.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Ed,
That's still a reply. Are you willing to leave this as the last post?
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
EDIT, a minute or two later: Oh, and try to be more civil in PMs, especially with messages entitled **** you.
I wish you nothing but happiness and recovery. And the ability to type 'with' rather than 'wiht', especially when you're angry.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Gumby
Veteran
Raid and the rest of the group: my apologies for this disruption of your thread.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
DANG! Now I have to find something else to do to kill the rest of the afternoon. This was almost as much fun as flirting with the coeds at Starbucks!
I'm reading the "Heavy Duty Tech Discussions" under the "read Instructions". Too Funny. I had two PhD level optical engineers that got into an argument over "optics". It was ugly. One was a theoretician and modeling guy, the other was an experimentalist guy.
The theory guy was so far off, EVEN I could explain to him why it would not work. They never talked to each other again, and I took the theory guy off the project.
Maybe I'll ask the two of them about cleaning marks.
The theory guy was so far off, EVEN I could explain to him why it would not work. They never talked to each other again, and I took the theory guy off the project.
Maybe I'll ask the two of them about cleaning marks.
Gumby
Veteran
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Al,
You must never have enjoyed much success with them. I know which I'd go for. Although, come to think of it, Starbucks...
(Again, sorry, couldn't resist. 3000+ words of novel written today with 18-year-old collaborator. We take it in turns on the keyboard. I can remember most of what it's like to be 18, as no doubt you can, all too clearly. But she's still there, and can remember things we have taken some care to forget. School dinners. Revision. Applying for jobs in the summer vacation.)
Love, light and peace,
R.
peterm1
Veteran
Incidentally while not the same, as some here already know I am sure, if you have one or two substantial (deep and wide) gouges in the front element a successful strategy is the fill this with some black substance. This prevents light being reflected off the edges of the scratch and producing point flare in the image. Works surprisingly well. Just conjecture - I suppose it might even work with lots of small uniform scratches (of course it would be necessary to be careful to keep the black off the smooth unscrathed surface by wiping it into the scratch grooves) although in this case I would expect it to substantially reduce passage of light and hence effective f stop. As I say, just a randomo thought - I wonder if anyone has tried it? The effect I would be expect would be that the flare would eb reduced or eliminated. Any comments?
raid
Dad Photographer
Al,
Now you stop it. You are 5 years too old to be flirting with coeds at Starbucks.
I used an eye-glass repair "kit" to improve the performance of a collapsible Summicron 5cm f2 that was opaque when I got it. It is a liquid polymer that dries to a fairly hard surface. I used optical polishing sheets to get rid of the worst of the damage and the repair kit to fill in the many wipe marks. Overall contrast was reduced compared to a mint Summicron, but it gave surpisingly good performance. At F2, good portrait lens and at F4 hard to tell the difference.
robklurfield
eclipse
Roger and others: why did you stop? I was really enjoying the exchanges.
I rented a parking space to someone once for storage of his very-well kempt LR 90. He painted the floor of my rather tatty garage before parking in it. I believe the oil leaks spreading on the floor from my 24 yr old Porsche finally chased him away, as he could not bear to share space with someone of inferior hygenic habits (if he'd have paid for a top-end rebuild, I'd gladly have had work done on his schedule). As a Leica user, I suspect he's somewhere on the board here, too, though I haven't located him yet. [WL the 2d, if you're out there somewhere, my Mrs. would pay you to have your garage door clicker, as my kid lost ours.]
Scratched lenses are no fun, but worse is a scratched cornea.
I rented a parking space to someone once for storage of his very-well kempt LR 90. He painted the floor of my rather tatty garage before parking in it. I believe the oil leaks spreading on the floor from my 24 yr old Porsche finally chased him away
, as he could not bear to share space with someone of inferior hygenic habits (if he'd have paid for a top-end rebuild, I'd gladly have had work done on his schedule). As a Leica user, I suspect he's somewhere on the board here, too, though I haven't located him yet. [WL the 2d, if you're out there somewhere, my Mrs. would pay you to have your garage door clicker, as my kid lost ours.]Scratched lenses are no fun, but worse is a scratched cornea.