MP gets much "dirtier" than M6

[Kl@usW.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Am 16.1.2020 um 22:58 schrieb adan:

I don't have either model to check - but is there a difference in the finder window glass coating?

It's my impression that the MP has a coating more like the digital Ms - with a purplish cast, compared to more yellow in the M6 Classic (preTTL).

The newer coating improves finder clarity (just like lens coatings), but also makes any fingerprints more obvious, both in reflectivity from the outside ("silvery" fingerprints against the dark finder tunnel), and in clarity when looking through the finder. Fingerprints don't show quite as starkly on the older, yellower coating (but the finder is slightly muddier all the time).

My digital Ms are more fingerprint-prone than I remember from M4/M6 days.

___________

 

Adan, you are right--for obvious reasons: the better the coating is, the more the  dirt  will show--even the same amount of dirt is more visible and thus more irritating on a 5- ( or more ) layer coating than on a  simple coating. Uncoated glass: Reflection of up to 2% per surface on new glass. Multi coating about 0,2%..... but you see the dirt much better.  That's why I suggest the simple uncoated spectacle glasses for kids who never care for their spectacles ( I'm an ophthalmologist )  The manufacturers of spectacle glasses try to convince customers into buying  the more expensive " super coated" glasses by adding a "nano-coating" to  their lenses.....

Summary: the better coated new finder glasses don't get dirtier than the old ones, its just more visible. 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[shirubadanieru]

4 hours ago, ianman said:

Balderdash! I don't know about all brands but my Nikon FM2 for example is just as well built as my MP. Just because we use Leica doesn't mean all the others brands are rubbish.

True true didn’t mean to say all other cameras are crap lol I was thinking more about current cameras which are all made of plastic but yes, for example  the Nikon rangefinder cameras and lenses beautiful and hasselblad too is amazing, you’re absolutely correct  

[pgk]

In all seriousness, if anyone wants a soft, environmentally friendly cleaning cloth which can be washed (use pure soap - Tech Wash) and reused, then try getting hold of some Selvyt cloths: http://www.selvyt.co.uk/selvyt-cloths/polishing-cloths/selvyt-sr.html no affiliation but I've used them for decades and one permanently protects a large mineral glass dome port and has done so for years.

[jaapv]

11 hours ago, Kl@usW. said:

Adan, you are right--for obvious reasons: the better the coating is, the more the  dirt  will show--even the same amount of dirt is more visible and thus more irritating on a 5- ( or more ) layer coating than on a  simple coating. Uncoated glass: Reflection of up to 2% per surface on new glass. Multi coating about 0,2%..... but you see the dirt much better.  That's why I suggest the simple uncoated spectacle glasses for kids who never care for their spectacles ( I'm an ophthalmologist )  The manufacturers of spectacle glasses try to convince customers into buying  the more expensive " super coated" glasses by adding a "nano-coating" to  their lenses.....

Summary: the better coated new finder glasses don't get dirtier than the old ones, its just more visible. 

 

Nano coating is amazingly easy to keep clean.

[Ouroboros]

2 hours ago, pgk said:

In all seriousness, if anyone wants a soft, environmentally friendly cleaning cloth which can be washed (use pure soap - Tech Wash) and reused, then try getting hold of some Selvyt cloths: http://www.selvyt.co.uk/selvyt-cloths/polishing-cloths/selvyt-sr.html no affiliation but I've used them for decades and one permanently protects a large mineral glass dome port and has done so for years.

Whenever I go for an eye test I ask the Optician for microfibre cleaning cloths.  They're free.  

[pgk]

39 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

Whenever I go for an eye test I ask the Optician for microfibre cleaning cloths.  They're free.  

But yet more consumer 'plastic' which will end up in landfill. We need to move on.

[Ouroboros]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, pgk said:

But yet more consumer 'plastic' which will end up in landfill. We need to move on.

 

Gosh.....hope I never need a colostomy or a prosthesis.

[Ouroboros]

....or dentures

[pgk]

They are needlessly disposable. And they aren't free. Do we really want to leave a legacy of disposable plastics to future generations when perfectly good alternatives exist? Plastics can be extremely useful but I am tired of the wanton wastage which we all seem to embrace.

[Ouroboros]

7 hours ago, pgk said:

They are needlessly disposable. And they aren't free. Do we really want to leave a legacy of disposable plastics to future generations when perfectly good alternatives exist? Plastics can be extremely useful but I am tired of the wanton wastage which we all seem to embrace.

We've already left a huge legacy of plastic waste for future generations.  What we are doing on a daily basis, and that includes you, is adding to that legacy even though most of  us, like you, don't want to.  We all know the damage has already been done and it continues unabated. 

This issue is not so much about educating the public,  I believe most reasonable people are perfectly capable of understanding the problem and sincerely wanting to stem the tide. 

It comes down to forcing change in the way things are manufactured, processed, transported, packaged and ultimately disposed of.  I suspect your example of Selvyt cleaning cloths (I used them daily during my days as a drum scanner operator in the mid 80's and still do use them) rely largely on plastics for their packaging and transportation.    

[pgk]

9 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

This issue is not so much about educating the public,  I believe most reasonable people are perfectly capable of understanding the problem and sincerely wanting to stem the tide. 

In Wales we had to have numerous committees discussing topics such as smoking in public places, plastic bag taxes and so on. What seems reasonable to some of us is very much open to discussion for others.

We all have an impact, its about minimising it.

[Kl@usW.]

Am 18.1.2020 um 10:58 schrieb jaapv:

Nano coating is amazingly easy to keep clean.

yes, I agree, but I only recall Nikon broadcasting their lenses to have nano while in premium spectacle glasses its default ... As it is such an advantage in keeping the surface clean, I wonder why its not applied more frequently. Cost or optical problem ? 

[Ouroboros]

On 1/19/2020 at 9:39 AM, pgk said:

In Wales we had to have numerous committees discussing topics such as smoking in public places, plastic bag taxes and so on. What seems reasonable to some of us is very much open to discussion for others.

We all have an impact, its about minimising it.

Being somewhat puzzled by your reply to my post #25, I think you might have mistakenly assumed I was referring to 'disposable' fluid impregnated microfibre lens cloths.  I was not.

I was referring to the microfibre cleaning cloths that you'll find in Specsavers glasses cases which I also use to clean my cameras and lenses.  I repeatedly wash them and reuse them, I do not throw them away.

 

 

[james.liam]

On 1/17/2020 at 1:37 PM, ianman said:

Balderdash! I don't know about all brands but my Nikon FM2 for example is just as well built as my MP. Just because we use Leica doesn't mean all the others brands are rubbish.

Here, here!

My FM2-T and FM3a are both rock solid, dense (in a reassuring way) and built to outlast its owner. Same goes for Nikkor AIS lenses.