How does it compare to 1.67? I used to see more coating issues with 1.74 after 1-2 years but it seems to be improved now? Is it more durable in plus lenses?
How does it compare to 1.67? I used to see more coating issues with 1.74 after 1-2 years but it seems to be improved now? Is it more durable in plus lenses?
Coatings in general have really improved across the board in the last 5 years, application, adherence etc. 1.74 does seem to be better than it used to be if it is done by people that know how to do it. I have much less problems than I did in say 2014 or so. I don't think I have ever used Hoya 1.74 though so specifically I can't speak to that but I bet they have incorporated the same tricks and techniques as other large manufacturers.
An old but still relevant thread.
Does this rise to warrant Hall of Fame status?
Note post #16 from the late Chris Ryser:
https://www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php/33316-Mineral-Glass-still-most-frequently-used-material?highlight=coating+delamination
The link on post #33 no longer works. Makes me wonder what it said.
What's relevant from that thread to the current state of Hoya 1.74 coatings? IMO I don't think people arguing back and forth about what an outdated Essilor website meant to say warrants HOF status. Unless I'm missing something.
As to the broken links, you can get the info, minus what appears to be some graphics, from TheWaybackMachine.
Global Marketplace
The Materials
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks