Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Issues with Canon Fluorine coatings on some lenses

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Issues with Canon Fluorine coatings on some lenses

    Roger Cicala at Lensrentals (who IMHO does the best lens sharpness, variance and repairability testing out there) made an interesting point I hadn't heard before in his comparison of the 70-200 f2.8 II and III build quality (short version - they're the same). He specifically says (and remember he sees hundreds of lenses that get used a lot):

    As an aside, we despise the new fluorine front and rear coatings and consider them a significant step backward in durability.

    Canon claims the new fluorine coating makes it easier to wipe off oil and smudges. I think the new fluorine coating is easier to wipe off.

    Then in the comments:

    Roger Cicala
    According to Canon fluorine coating makes it much easier to clean the front and rear elements, so dirt and oil can be easily wiped away. With at least some of the lenses Canon has released with this coating, our opinion is the coating is very fragile. We started putting filters on all of our lenses a year after Canon started putting fluorine coating on their front elements; the incidence of lenses needing front element replacements for coating scratches and peeling skyrocketed. Canon says it's not so, so perhaps it's just us.

    DrJon
    Which begs the question - which other Canon lenses have the fragile coating? The 100-400 II for example? (I actually have a front filter for mine arriving any second though. My 70-200 is a II so not an issue.)
    Also which filters did you choose for the 70-200s?

    Roger Cicala
    The 24-70 f/2.8 II is by far the worst, 100-400 IIs were frequent flyers too. We went with B&W clear filters.

    DrJon
    Thanks. The filters I prefer are the B+W MRC Nano clear ones, but of course they have a similar coating!??!


    As an aside as of about 30 minutes ago my 100-400 II has a B+W MRC Nano filter attached to its front.


    #2
    Re: Issues with Canon Fluorine coatings on some lenses

    thx for sharing

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Issues with Canon Fluorine coatings on some lenses

      While I'm at it I wasn't aware of this either (for shipping lenses, e.g. back for repair) from the same comments section:

      margo2000
      Roger, can you please explain the point about the IS unit possibly being damaged in transport if IS is turned OFF? Should we keep the IS in the ON position when we transport these lenses?


      Roger Cicala
      The proper thing to do is 1) Turn IS off at the lens while the lens is still mounted to a camera. This 'locks' the IS unit in place. If you have IS on and just remove the lens from the camera, then it does not lock and off the camera flipping the switch does no good.

      You can confirm by gently shacking the lens; there's very little noise if the IS is locked.

      The locked position is safer for transporting the lens. If it's not locked the IS unit can bounce around and cause damage. How big a deal is it? I can't say for sure, but maybe 1 in 1,000 shipments that come back with IS not locked are damaged. But the incidence is 0 in 1,000; or very close to that, with IS locked.

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Issues with Canon Fluorine coatings on some lenses

        I didn't know about the IS locking, I will take that into account in future.
        Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way

        Comment

        Working...
        X