Single Coated vs. Multi-Coated

[dynachrome]

I took delivery of a Yashica DSB 39-80mm f/3.5 lens today. It seems to be in nice condition. When I look toward the front element, it doesn't look single coated. There are too many colors. My collection of Yashica DSB lenses is small. I have read in a number of places that the DSB lenses were all single coated. The Yashica MC lenses I have also do not look single coated.

Each manufacturer went to either improved coating or multicoating at different times. The Konica Hexanon lenses which were all black and had the EE lock pin were introduced in 1972 and were all multicoated. Canon and Minolta went to improved coating in 1973. Asahi Optical did so in 1971 with its SMCT lenses. Nikon did this in stages. The all black 105/2.5 Nikkor-P has multicoating even though it came out before the PC model. There was no regular (non-PC) 35/2.8 Nikkor with the C marking. The 35/2.8 Nikkor went from the S model directly to the 'K' model.

Canon had some FD lenses with the SC marking (as opposed to the SSC marking). These included the 28/2.8, the 50/1.8 and the 135/2.5, all excellent lenses. My own guess is that some lenses thought to be single coated, had rudimentary multi-coating.

 

[xkaes]

There is no legal definition of "multi-coating". Minolta was the first Japanese lens maker to apply it -- on ONE glass surface to a lens in 1958. It had two layers of magnesium fluoride -- one thin, one thick. One on top of the other. MULTI-COATING. They are both the same color so there is no way to tell that it is multi-coated. The other lens surfaces were single coated.

Some lenses, just like that early Minolta, but some modern day lenses, even Zeiss lenses, have multi-coating on just one lens element -- and call themselves "multi-coated".

So don't freak out. Some lenses don't look multi-coated, but are, and vice-versa. Minolta, and perhaps some other lens makers, clearly stated that they only use "Achromatic coatings" (their term for multi-coating) if and where it makes a difference. Lots of times it doesn't.

Don't confuse single-colored with single-coated -- or multi-colored with multi-coated. A lens that has a single color might have multi-coatings -- one layer on top of another. Likewise, a lens that has multiple colors might have single-coatings -- on different elements.

Does "multi-coating" mean multiple coatings on the same element? Or does it mean different coatings on different elements? Like I said There is no legal definition of "multi-coating".

 

[Plochmann]

How many colors? lol. Most SC lenses still will appear yellow/gold, blue, and even green. I think SC just means less variety, but still some variety. In the end, take it out for a shoot and see if you like it. I've bought stuff expecting it to suck and loved it, and stuff expecting to be amazing, and not loved it. In the end, the facts and figures of the lens have little to do your taste.

 

[Sirius Glass]

How many colors? lol. Most SC lenses still will appear yellow/gold, blue, and even green. I think SC just means less variety, but still some variety. In the end, take it out for a shoot and see if you like it. I've bought stuff expecting it to suck and loved it, and stuff expecting to be amazing, and not loved it. In the end, the facts and figures of the lens have little to do your taste.

Welcome to APUG Photrio!!​

 

[ic-racer]

Yashica made some nice 35mm format lenses. I have quite a few, though they are all ML.

My experience with some of the older Yashica ML zooms is just a little haze, multplied by all the surfaces, will deteriorate the image more than any inferiority of single coating (assuming there is any inferiority). So if you lens is clear on all the surfaces, I suspect it will be a great performer.