I'm looking for an AR coating that's very clear. I've tried Crizal, Reflection Free, Zeiss Super ET, and Komodo. I like them all but the reflect is very noticeable. Anyone know of an AR that's invisible these days? Is it my imagination, or didn't AR used to be clearer? (Not that I want to use first generation AR again!) I would appreciate any advise. Thanks!
We also have a lot of problems with the bright greens of AR... I sometimes look at these lenses and think they are more obvious with the AR than without, however if the spectacles are fitted properly and angled in with a pantoscopic tilt it's not so noticeable.
The best AR we use is the Zeiss Gold ET.
It does the job, it's very subtle and it doesn't show up every greasy fingermark on the lens.
Hope this helps.... Clive
Most good A/R coatings should reflect less than .5% per surface of residual reflection. A normal uncoated surface will reflect at least 4% so the green color should be soft. Does this bright green appear on all lens material types or just a one type of lens material? Also be careful that you are not using cleaners which contain silicone additivies which when used on A/R coatings will leave a film which will increase the amount of reflection on the lens surface. The good A/R coatings today are far better than coatings years ago and are more consistent in color and performance.
Also make sure that the coating lab you are using is running the different lens materials in machines with specific formulas matched to the lens index. This is very important to maximize the low residual color you are looking for. We operate a coating lab in Dallas Texas and that is what we do to make sure the residual color is very low to make it less noticable.
For what it's worth...
AR coatings result in two effects: increased transmission and decreased reflections. The optical justification for the coatings obviously is the increased transmission which is so prized by we myopes at nite. The decreased reflections is a cosmetic benefit.
While theoretically possible to come close to 100% transmission, you probably wouldn't want that as every speck of dust would look like a beacon on the surface of the lens.
Most AR coatings today will AVERAGE in the 98.5 to 99.2 range on CR-39. The transmission is not constant across the visible spectrum but varies depending upon the wavelength measured. This variation results in the residual colors seen. These can be varied by the manufacturer and represent increased reflection in that wavelength giving the lens their particular "color."
You may remember the early single layer "mag fluoride" coatings which had a definite purple color. This was because the coating only increased transmission/decreased reflections in the middle of the spectrum leaving both ends reflecting, blue at the lower & red at the top; combine blue and red and you get purple.
For example, Zeiss published a chart comparing Super ET (blue-green) and Gold ET (obviously gold) as follows for CR-39:
At 507 nm W/O AR Gold ET Super ET
Transmission 98.2% 98.4%
Reflectance** 0.9% 0.8%
At 550 nm
Transmission 92.0% 97.4% 98.8%
Reflectance** 4.0% 1.3% 0.6%
(**Reflectance per surface)
In every case, the AR coating provides significantly increased transmission and decreased reflections which typically is a real people pleaser.
Hope this helps...
I am a big fan of Zeiss Gold. However, I recently got a pair of lenses from a rep that had Pentax coating and they look great! When dirty they have a green tint to them but clean em right and they disappear. Now with their professional program you can get them factory direct for next to nothing. Check em out, I don't think you'll be sorry.
Rodney
We have been doing about 80% AR rx's for the past 17 yrs. so I guess we have an opinion. All AR has reflex color of some sort, the early years, most had a purple cast and we did a lot of lavender and blue tints on lenses on facets then, so sometimes the AR would heighten the tint affect, some people liked it, some didn't. when it comes to AR, i'd rather have durability and a coating process that the coating lab stands behind! And that's Crizal! Zeiss is a great coating also. Not fond of the "gold", but the claet ET is really nice. But you can't beat how thaey stand behind the Crizal. As someone mentioned, Pentax has a great product also, we use a lot of their prefinished lenses for several years, they've held up well.
There are a number of AR products that have no color on the market today. These appear invisible as they have no residual reflection color. You can get a sample of these from a number of labs around the country: Laramy K, Nouvea, Precision Optical, Interstate, Central among others.
If it is a lower reflection you are looking for, you should ask your supplier or potential supplier of AR for their transmission specifications. The higher the number (closer to 100) the lower the residual reflection will be. This will make the color on the lens lower. Most in the US are between 98% and 99%.
Yes, help. I am new to Hoya lab and their products and for the first time ever with their coatings I am getting pt anti green feedback. I must agree it is bright green. Any help with a list of brand names and their reflection colors? I have used a lot but as far as compatibility goes...hmm Thanks in advance
As you already know Hoya is a green-> yellow color, as are coatings the Crizal line (Avance, Alize, Crizal Sun) ( from Essilor/Varilux). Most of the Zeiss/Sola Coatings are in the Purple->Blue family (Carat Advantage Blue. Carat Blue, Teflon, Super ET), expect for those coating that have Gold in the name as the name implies those as Yellow with some green hints (Carat Advantage Gold, Carat Gold). Most in house ARs are going to be made on either Zeiss Machines or Crizal Machines and will have colors that correspond to the machine used. My favorite of those coatings are the Endura line (green->yellow) and Sharpview (also green->yellow).
However in our office (as opposed to most of the other posters in this thread) we prefer the appearance Crizal/Hoya greens over the Zeiss purples.
Those are the coating that I've dealt with and I know there are more manufacturers out there (Pentax, Kodak, and iCoat are three that I've come across on the web that I've never actually seen in person).
However, I'm much more concerned about the performance of the coating then the appearance of the coating. Furthermore, I'm much more concerned about the lens under the coating then the performance of the coating (well to a certain extent, as long as it's a somewhat modern hydrophobic coating that I'm selling, but that's all I sell, so this is a moot tangent).
Tell me where you are and I will point you to the lab closest to you that can provide you with the AR coating you seek.Originally Posted by specs4you
Which Hoya lab are you getting your product from if you know?
All the best,
AR Guy
I am new to Optiboard and I am enjoying this interesting mix of discussions from different points of view. I would like to add a little to the discussion if I may.
First, it does not matter what type of machine you have, it can produce almost any coating. For instance, at Hoya Dallas they have Leybold machines that produce house brand AR and Shincron machines to produce Super Hi-Vision. At Pentax, they have Satis and Denton and produce their own independent brand AR. There are roughly 8 commerially available manufacturers of AR coating equipment for Ophthalmics in the US.
Second, "clearer AR", residual reflection and percentage of transmission/reflection are not the same but can be interrelated. I don't want to go too deep in this discussion on the technical points. But, I do want to point out the market changes that have brought you to your point. In the early days of AR in the US, there were many problems. This led to a concentration on adhesion as a first order of business and low reflection (optimal for AR) of the AR as a second. As the market has changed and moved toward other characteristics (having solved for the most part the adhesion issues) such as scratch resistance, cleanability, anti-static, etc. the trade off has come to a small degree at the expense of the reflection. As we have seen the concentration on scratch resistance, the residual reflection has crept up. In the late 80's-early 90's most AR coatings were .5%-.7% reflection per surface. Now the typical AR is .8%-1.2% per surface.
Third, there are many hues or residual reflections. These are cosmetic effects of the AR and for the most part do not affect the performance of the AR in its most basic characteristics. Some like this color some like that one. Some colors, like the new colorless AR's, do offer a cosmetic benefit to the wearer by not giving back a residual reflection at all.
Lastly, most of what you read or hear is marketing (smoke and mirrors).
All the best,
i would be interested in seeing a smaple of the colorless AR.
Anyone in NM carry it?
The closest to you would be Nouveau Optical in Seattle, WA, 425-882-4333 or Brother's Optical in Anaheim, CA. (I don't have a phone number for them handy)
All the best,
AR Guy
I recommend the Zeiss PureCoat.....very clear and better than anything I have tried yet in my 16yrs of trialing AR. :D
You will always have some residual color, even the colorless A/R have a residual color of white. You just may not like the Green color.
the reason most manufacturers choose to have their residual color fall in the green range is that its most forgiving spectrum in that small deviations in metalics don't result in a large color shift.
Some A/R s have a purple cast, and you may find that better. Purple appears darker.
You may try Kodak CleAR, and as said Seiko/Pentax Surpass ECP is really good. Optima makes a Color Free A/R available on Poly only.
I would not recommend the Gold SET, it has a high reflectance in my opinion, but goes great with huge gold Cazal frames.
Makes sense.....................................
Is this not....................................what it should be all about ? A people pleaser.
..........when you please people, they are happy and don't really care who made the lens or the coating. They also don't care if it transmits 99.2% or 99.8% because in reality I would not know anybody that could tell the difference by looking through the lenses and comparing.
To actually do a comparison you need a spectrometer set up to measure the reflection angles and transmissions and that would cost you about close to $ 20,000.
Also I would like to congratulate Jim G for the reappearance on OptiBoard and hope you stick around for a while, or are the activities in Geezerville too hectic? :cheers:
Teflon coated is consider one of the clearest AR coated by far, it has up to 99.3% light transmission. We can easily notice that the Teflon arctic blue coated have obvious lesser refraction than those green coating AR lenses.
Correct me if im wrong
-rmarkz-
Teflon is the slick coat....................
Teflon is a brand name for the slick coat on top of the AR and has nothing to do with the AR coating itself.
My favourite for reflection is the Crizal D colour (not sure if it is available in the US). Essilor advertises that it allows 99.6 percent light transmission. It is purple, but it just disappears. When we first started to use it, a few times, when a client picked up the glasses, the optician thought that I forgot to insert the lenses on first glance. That is how clear it is.
We do alot of Hoya Super Hi Vision and have good luck with it. Now they have just came out with a new coation EX3. Got our first pair in yesterday and I guess we will find out how well it works.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks