Thank you, sounds great!

Paul

> Im using a 18" black light i bought
> for $20.
>
> Last batch of lenses cleared in about
> a month. I ran for 3 months just to
> be thorough.
>
> Direct sunlight is faster but there
> is the issue of excess heat.
>
> JCO
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
>      J.C. O'Connell   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://jcoconnell.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 6:32 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: 35mm f/2 Super Takumar
>
>
> HI JCO,
>
> Thanks for the info!
>
> It is indeed the later version. By prolonged exposure to UV, do you
> suppose sunlight or a sun lamp? Or possibly a special UV curing lamp like
> dentists use? Also how long is prolonged exposure? hours? days? weeks?
>
> Thanks,
>
> paul
>
>
> Very common if it's the late version
>> with the 49mm filter threads.
>>
>> Can be "cleared up" with prolonged exposure
>> to UV light.
>>
>> I've currently got one in such a process
>> myself.
>> JCO
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>> ----
>>      J.C. O'Connell   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://jcoconnell.com
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>> ----
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 3:44 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: 35mm f/2 Super Takumar
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today I mounted up my 35mm f/2 Super Takumar (M42) and noticed for the
>> first time that the viewfinder image was very warm. Tending towards the
>> yellow. I can't see any discoloration on any of the lens elements, but
>> in
>> comparison with other lenses, like the 35mm f/3.5, the image is
>> decidedly
>> more warm. Is this common for the f/2 or just an abnormality in my
>> example?
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> paul
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>


Reply via email to