Posts: 7,776
Threads: 1,780
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
37
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 114
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2019
Reputation:
3
Yeah, like 58/1.9 lens ("Selena") with four elements approaches the price of Voigtlaender SL 58/1.4 or Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 Classic, both made with crystal glass, both with CPU contacts, both with jumping diaphragm blades that work with film SLRs...
Helios Jupiter 85/1.5 is a nice lens, although a bit overpriced. But the Selena specs looks ridiculous... That was the first from the list I opened. Won't bother checking the rest.
You just can't have too many lenses...
Posts: 114
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2019
Reputation:
3
(05-15-2021, 06:08 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Cristal glass?
Lead crystal, unless it's just a legend
You just can't have too many lenses...
Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
25
05-16-2021, 01:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-16-2021, 03:06 PM by Brightcolours.)
No (lead?) crystal was used for lens elements, but rather lead glass (glass lacks a crystalline structure). The only crystal I know of that gets used in lenses is fluorite. Of course, lenses that have lead glass elements usually also have other types of glass in other elements, it depends on the refractive properties wanted for the element.
The use of lead glass (glass containing lead oxide) for its refractive properties was pretty common anyway, but because the production od lead oxide glass is a source of pollution, lead oxides in optical glass has been replaced with other metal oxides.
Posts: 114
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2019
Reputation:
3
Hey, please don't kill the messenger. I suppose the term "lead crystal" is born is someone's marketing department, but hey - is this the first time they do that to us?
Anyway, Wikipedia gives more details about this issue -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_glass
You just can't have too many lenses...
Posts: 2,904
Threads: 30
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
19
It indeed looks like a translation error.
Anyway, the cheapest of those lenses (the 60/2.8 macro) is almost $500 and it's really a bit too much for what they seem to be. I'd be glad to be mistaken but for me MF is a no-go anyway...
