A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Medium Format > Kiev > coated vs. uncoated lenses

Featured Equipment Deals

The DSLR's Multi-Selector and Playback Features (Video Tutorial) Read More

The DSLR's Multi-Selector and Playback Features (Video Tutorial)

This video tutorial will teach you how to navigate your camera and review the images you've taken. Your DSLR has multiple viewing panels within the playback mode that allow you to examine and assess...

Latest Learning Articles

Featured Member: Katarzyna Gritzmann Read More

Featured Member: Katarzyna Gritzmann

Photo.net featured member Katarzyna Gritzmann talks about photography and portfolio of images.

coated vs. uncoated lenses

Blarg . , Apr 10, 2008; 02:09 p.m.

I'm trying to decide between buying coated or uncoated lenses for my Salyut-S.

Obviously, the uncoated lenses are much cheaper. I do a fair amount of long-exposure photography at night (all B&W) and I'm wondering if the coatings provide me with any advantage shooting at night.

Right now I'm considering a 30mm 150mm and 250mm lens, but I'm shooting a Vega-12 right now, which is uncoated. If there's a significant difference, I might consider replacing the Vega-12 with an 80mm Volna-3 MC as well.

I am occasionally getting flare on my shots, but there doesn't seem to be any consistency to it...I can take 3 shots in a row from the same position on a tripod and get flare on one.

Also, from what I understand, there is no way to get an uncoated lens coated at a price that makes it a reasonable thing to do considering the lenses cost under $300...is that right?


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Dan Fromm , Apr 10, 2008; 03:07 p.m.

Uncoated? Are you sure you aren't confusing uncoated with single-coated?

Blarg . , Apr 10, 2008; 03:19 p.m.

I don't know. The information on the lenses is a bit spotty. Here's what I came up with.

Zodiak-8 (30mm) uncoated Arsat 30 MC multi-coated

Jupiter-36 (250mm) uncoated Arsat 250 MC, multicoated

Vega-12 (90mm) possibly single-coated - I can't really tell

Volna-3 MC (80mm) multi-coated

I'd love to be wrong and buy the cheaper versions.

I'm pretty sure that the difference between multi-coated and single-coated lenses isn't worth paying double for.

Bueh B. , Apr 10, 2008; 03:28 p.m.

Buy the cheaper version. Single-coated and uncoated lens are just as good as multi-coated lenses, and only in very few situations there might be a noticeable improvement with modern multi-coated lenses. Check out the Classic Camera forum for many excellent photos taken with vintage, un- or single-coated glass.

Blarg . , Apr 10, 2008; 03:31 p.m.

well if it HAS a coating I agree Bueh. The multicoating might reduce the severity of the flare, but if it's going to flare, it's still going to flare, right?

Michael Gilday , Apr 10, 2008; 03:54 p.m.

It really depends on where you're getting the lenses from. The Arsat lenses you list are - or so I'm told - the exact same lenses as their un/single-coated counterparts physically - same glass, same metal, off the same assembly lines - which are then gone over by Arsat after the fact. They do - or claim to do - quite a bit more than just multicoating the elements. You pay a hefty premium for all the value-added service they provide, and the peace of mind of knowing you're not buying a "dog". So, if that sort of thing is really important to you... go for the Arsats. Otherwise, buy the non-rebranded lenses from someplace with a good return policy.

That said, the difference between otherwise good - and identical - uncoated, or single-coated, lenses isn't worth worrying about.

Have you flocked the film chamber of your camera? I did that to my Kiev-60, and it made a world of difference. Like you, I shoot a lot of photos at night and under other unusual lighting conditions, and haven't ever run into flare with the 80mm Volna. I sometimes run into problems with the 45mm Mir, but that's kind of to be expected.

Blarg . , Apr 10, 2008; 04:07 p.m.

well the non-arsat lenses are used, but are from someone who is selling his own personal gear and was quite happy with it.

I have not flocked the camera yet, but I'm planning to send it to Arax this summer to be flocked, adjusted, and the shutter replaced with a titanium one. I just wanted to shoot some film before I send it out just to make sure I've caught all the quirks that need to be adjusted. So far, the only problems I've noticed are:

1) static fog (probably due to sloppy handling while loading the film on reels

2) flare/fog at night on some shots when doing long exposures (1-30 minutes) (might be due to internal reflection...hard to tell what the source is)

3) sometimes (especially when using a cable release) film doesn't advance when I cock the camera. Don't know if this is a back or camera problem

4) back needs to be twisted to the right to release from the camera. Don't know if this is a back or camera problem either.

However, these are minor annoyances and for the most part it works great. According to the serial number I believe it's a 1980 manufacture. I suppose I could send the lenses too if I find problems with them.

Mike Earussi , Apr 10, 2008; 05:33 p.m.

It's not just flare that coatings help with, but the overall contrast as well. At night you're almost always shooting directly into lights, a situation guarenteed to maximise flare problems. So unless you actually want washed out pictures I would suggest you buy lenses with the best coating you can.

Blarg . , Apr 10, 2008; 05:48 p.m.

that's exactly why I'm asking if there are 2 versions of these lenses with different coatings.

Jenny Jaques , Apr 10, 2008; 07:53 p.m.

Whichever the brand, whatever the situation, the best possible lens shade is advisable and more so with non- and single-coated objectives.

Photography at night may well present situations with street lighting and/or vehicle lights outside the image frame. These will in many cases degrade the exposure. Eliminate them with a shade.


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses