To compare to the optical and physical properties of covering materials for plastic greenhouse, EVA(ethylene vinyl acetate, 0.08 mm), polyorefine antifog (0.1 mm), fluoric (0.06 mm), diffused (0.15 mm), polyorefine antidrop (0.15 mm) and PET (polyethylene terephthalate, 0.5 mm) films were used. The small greenhouse (5.4$\times$18.5$\times$2.9 m, W$\times$L$\times$H) investigated during 3 years form 1997 to 1999. After covering materials were used for greenhouse covering during 30 months, UV (300-400 nm) transmittances of diffused film and PET were appeared from 25 to 26%, while those of fluoric film and the other films were 76% and from 63 to 67%. For PAR (photosynthetically active radiation, 400-700 nm), the transmittances of fluoric, antidrop, PET, antifog, EVA, and diffused film were 86.5%, 80.5%, 76.3%, 75.5%, 74.1% and 61.9% respectively. The losses of PAR transmittance of EVA and the antidrop film during period between 7 days and 30 months were higher value 12% and lower value 6% than any other film. Under the canopy of tomato plants, light intensities of the diffused film and the antifog film were 2.5 times and 1.4 times higher than those of PET. Tensile resistances of fluoric film at the break point were the higher than those of antifog film and diffused film. While impact resistance of the antidrop film was the highest value, but the fluoric film was the lowest. Air temperature inside the greenhouse for the day showed to be changed the similar light transmittance of the films. But the increasing order of air temperature for the night was PET, fluoric, antidrop, diffused, antifog and EVA film. Especially, air temperature in the PET was 4$^{\circ}C$ higher than that in the EVA. Solar radiations of the fluoric film, the antidrop film, PET and antifog film in the greenhouse were 32%, 15%, 11% and 4% higher than those of PET. However, those of the diffused film was 7% less than PET.