At 00:06 2/15/01, Titoy wrote:
Hi John:
Why do you prefer the Single Coated version over the multicoated one as
mentioned below? In my limited knowledge is it not that most peole would go
for a multicoated one?
If I were selecting between an SC and MC side by side without being able to
shoot either first, I would pick the MC if visual inspection shows them in
equal condition. However, now that I've used my SC for a while I would
want to shoot film through an MC first to ensure it is as good or better
before selling or trading the SC one.
My remark was intended to say that even the SC versions of the 300/4.5 seem
to be very strong performers. It's the only SC lens I have and it has
proven to be so good I don't feel any need to eventually replace it with an
MC. Also, unlike the wide lenses, the 300/4.5 has only a few elements, it
is much less likely to get into flare trouble with a lens this long, and my
guess is at least some of its glass has a high refractive index. All this
makes the performance difference between SC and MC less noticeable (if they
are in the same condition).
-- John
< 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 >
|