Hoya Hi-Vision LongLife: COLTS Real Life Simulation Results

[Nikolay Angelov]

I found a document with the results of the Real Life simulation test done by COLTS Laboratories for Hoya's LongLife ARC.

The lens tested is 1,67 with the Hi-Vision LongLife coating. I think the equivalent coating in North America is called Super Hi-Vision EX3.

The file is in Polish, but copy paste in google translate gives excellent results :)
http://www.hoya.pl/download/dn.php/4...Test_Colts.pdf

Best regards,
Nikolay Angelov

[Craig]

Summary?

[DragonLensmanWV]

Good stuff.

[rickyforever]

tks for the file and i'll download it

[sharpstick777]

It's amazing to me on how most of the real Colt's data I have found has only come out in far away lands, in languages other than English. If you try to get Colt's data from a Hoya rep in the US, they can't even get it from their own company. Essilor as well, most of the Essilor Colt's data I have found came from Singapore, the Balkans or Australia.

[sharpstick777]

Translation: According to the data, Hoya LongLife scores a 4.92 in Colt's Real-Life Simulation Test. If that is correct, it's pretty impressive. Maybe even too impressive.

In the Colt's RLS test, 5.0 is considered perfect. Colt's RLS is the best AR measurement we currently have. It simulates 3 years of wear, exposure and includes normal temperature variations. The Bayer Abrasion test is not as accurate because it only considers hardness. Although it seems great, hardness can actually contribute to crazing and a hard AR is not necessarily a long lasting AR. A good AR has to flex along with the lens beneath it to ensure resistance to crazing. Basically, and lens that scores 5.0 won't wear, scratch or deteriorate the slightest in 3 years of wear, and even maintain its clean-ability over that time.

I would like to see the REAL Colt's Data sheet though. One thing I have found around the world is that many manufactures claim great RLS test numbers, but can't back it up. An Essilor Rep told me once that Avance scored a 4.79, however, Colts said it was impossible because they had never tested any AR at that number. To this day, Essilor has not released any official Avance Data from Colt's. The only verifiable Avance data I have found came from Slovakia? and listed Avance at 4.62, still good enough to put it in third place. However, since they improve the AR frequently, it’s possible this years model scored higher.

Another example of this if you look up Hoya's 1.70 specific gravity, you will get different number from every Hoya website around the world. So if I don’t trust Hoya, its for this reason.

I went by Colt's booth at Vision Expo but it was "unmanned" and empty.

The other downside to Colt's testing is that the manufacturer themselves submits the sample, which means that a company can supply a "golden sample" not produced in real life manufacturing. I have seen some amazing test AR's, but they cannot be reproduced in a high volume commercial lab. Unfortunately we have no way around this until someone can drop a dime on independent testing where the lenses are pulled from real production.
Regrettably, Colt's does not release the testing data themselves. Each manufacturer can choose to release the numbers or not. That makes wild claims possible. The only way to verify this through Hoya. Colt's wont say which manufacturer score what, but they can say if any manufacture has ever scored a certain number. Hoya could of course back up there claim by releasing the actual Colt's Data sheet, but will they? Anyone at Hoya want to comment?

[star]

Translation: According to the data, Hoya LongLife scores a 4.92 in Colt's Real-Life Simulation Test. If that is correct, it's pretty impressive. Maybe even too impressive.

In the Colt's RLS test, 5.0 is considered perfect. Colt's RLS is the best AR measurement we currently have. It simulates 3 years of wear, exposure and includes normal temperature variations. The Bayer Abrasion test is not as accurate because it only considers hardness. Although it seems great, hardness can actually contribute to crazing and a hard AR is not necessarily a long lasting AR. A good AR has to flex along with the lens beneath it to ensure resistance to crazing. Basically, and lens that scores 5.0 won't wear, scratch or deteriorate the slightest in 3 years of wear, and even maintain its clean-ability over that time.

I would like to see the REAL Colt's Data sheet though. One thing I have found around the world is that many manufactures claim great RLS test numbers, but can't back it up. An Essilor Rep told me once that Avance scored a 4.79, however, Colts said it was impossible because they had never tested any AR at that number. To this day, Essilor has not released any official Avance Data from Colt's. The only verifiable Avance data I have found came from Slovakia? and listed Avance at 4.62, still good enough to put it in third place. However, since they improve the AR frequently, it’s possible this years model scored higher.

Another example of this if you look up Hoya's 1.70 specific gravity, you will get different number from every Hoya website around the world. So if I don’t trust Hoya, its for this reason.

I went by Colt's booth at Vision Expo but it was "unmanned" and empty.

The other downside to Colt's testing is that the manufacturer themselves submits the sample, which means that a company can supply a "golden sample" not produced in real life manufacturing. I have seen some amazing test AR's, but they cannot be reproduced in a high volume commercial lab. Unfortunately we have no way around this until someone can drop a dime on independent testing where the lenses are pulled from real production.
Regrettably, Colt's does not release the testing data themselves. Each manufacturer can choose to release the numbers or not. That makes wild claims possible. The only way to verify this through Hoya. Colt's wont say which manufacturer score what, but they can say if any manufacture has ever scored a certain number. Hoya could of course back up there claim by releasing the actual Colt's Data sheet, but will they? Anyone at Hoya want to comment?

NOW we are already at 2012 ;we got update hoya with smp venus guard // essilor with crizal sapphire and scotchgard // ziess with pure coat ;and the point is not just scratch resistance ;due to ;at instance coat peels you get same effect as if it would be full scratched !the question to be answered is of course which lens stand out over all the rest on coat quality along with scratch resistance .

[Chris Ryser]

To this day, Essilor has not released any official Avance Data from Colt's. The only verifiable Avance data I have found came from Slovakia? and listed Avance at 4.62, still good enough to put it in third place. However, since they improve the AR frequently, it’s possible this years model scored higher.

Colt is not the only and holy know it all and prove it all company. Most manufacturers of some name and consience when they develope a product, do their own testing of quality and have no need for paying another party to come up with the same results as they do. Just about all of them have the needed equipment to do it. If they do not have the equipment for some special testing most of times their local universities can do them against a fee.

If a manufacturer improves their AR frequently they have to have the the ways to find out in house. As a manufacturer of dyes I have one of the best reflecctance-spectrometers, for quaility testing, (can be used to measure AR coatings) on the market (close to $ 20,000) so nobody can pull any wool over my head with wrong claims.

As time has progresssed rapidly in technologies, the use of commercial testing labs has heavily declined and the last one five of them in the Montreal area just closed their doors a few weeks back.

Furthermore which manufacturer these days wants to submit samples for testing against other competitive products and become number 2 or 3 in rank of quality which then gets publizised in somebody elses favour. I believe these times are gone forever. Colts website ranking is at an all time low as of Alexa 15,632,704 against for example OptiBoard which ranks at 127,873 (best ranking is 1)

[EyeMaster]

Companies are now reluctant to release details of scratch comparisons. Ages ago it was rumored that the big E tied up H for years with frivolous litigation when H said Super HiVision was the most scratch resistant AR product going and compared it to Crizal at half the scratch resistance of SHV.

[star]

I wish wearers of hoya shv-ex3 and zeiss pure coat ;would be sharing their experience with their lens 'as far peeling and scratching is concerned ;

[EyeMaster]

and why not the wearers of the Essilor brand of AR coatings?

[star]

and why not the wearers of the Essilor brand of AR coatings?

essilor is best as for scratch free ;but peels ;

[EyeMaster]

"essilor is best as for scratch free"

and how do you know it's the best?

[sharpstick777]

I wish wearers of hoya shv-ex3 and zeiss pure coat ;would be sharing their experience with their lens 'as far peeling and scratching is concerned ;

Welcome To Optiboard!

Many posts in other forums for you.. very recently . just search away...

[star]

Welcome To Optiboard!

Many posts in other forums for you.. very recently . just search away...

am coming from there ;nothing on about hoya shv-ex3 with upgraded scratch resistance