Schneider Symmar-S Ebay offer question?

[Omega]

I didn't feal like writing the full question in the title, but i came across a Schnerider Symmar-S Lens on Ebay a few days ago, when i looked at the picture i saw some white dots around the perimeter of the rear element (not on the glass). I was wondering if any one here has any idea of what i could be. If the spots have no effect on the performance of the lens, i will purchase it. If you guys feel the lens isn't worth getting then i will not get it.

Here is the ebay offer: http://www.ebay.de/itm/4x5-schneider-kreuznach-Symmar-S-5-6-135-mm-/251635060345?pt=DE_Foto_Camcorder_Objektive&hash=item3a969e4e79

so your opinions on this lens would be appreciated

[AJ Edmondson]

Do a search on "schneideritis"... it's a fairly common anomaly having to do with the black coating applied to the periphery of lenses. Most folks claim it has little (if any) effect on the image but does have an effect on resale value.

Joel

[Michael Jones]

Ditto for AJ's comments. Its an unfortunate trait on many Schneider lenses, old & new.

mj

[Ari]

No effect on image quality.

[Omega]

Well then i think i will get the lens then. As i dont currently see myself reselling the lens anytime soon, i don't think it will be a problem.

[Jeff Dexheimer]

I use Schneider lenses with schneideritis all the time. I have never had a problem with it.

[Omega]

That is excellent! Has anyone ever compared the schneider Symmar-S 135mm to a Nikkor W 135mm? Since im currently stuck between getting either one or the other. I will be shooting landscapes with it.

[Jim Andrada]

+1 on classical Schneideritis - maybe more extreme than most but I'd spend more more time thinking about what was in front of the lens than a few spots inside it.

[Phil Hudson]

That is excellent! Has anyone ever compared the schneider Symmar-S 135mm to a Nikkor W 135mm? Since im currently stuck between getting either one or the other. I will be shooting landscapes with it.

The only major difference is that the Nikkor-W has multicoating which may result in slightly higher contrast and more resistance to flare, but this doesn't really make the Symmar a "worse" lens.....

[Louis Pacilla]

The only major difference is that the Nikkor-W has multicoating which may result in slightly higher contrast and more resistance to flare, but this doesn't really make the Symmar a "worse" lens.....

I believe that most ALL Schneider Symmar-"S" are multicoated as well just that each has it's own "color signature" due to multi coating formulas.

[Kevin Crisp]

The Symmar-S lenses were not initially multi-coated, later ones were. There are lots of both around. They are easy to tell apart by the coating's appearance and also that fact that the multicoated ones say so on the lens barrel. Both are outstanding, but multicoated ones and ones without Schneideritis are worth more. I had a set of the multicoated S lenses and they were really impressive. The burglars apparently thought so too.

[Louis Pacilla]

The Symmar-S lenses were not initially multi-coated, later ones were. There are lots of both around. They are easy to tell apart by the coating's appearance and also that fact that the multicoated ones say so on the lens barrel. Both are outstanding, but multicoated ones and ones without Schneideritis are worth more. I had a set of the multicoated S lenses and they were really impressive. The burglars apparently thought so too.

Well this maybe true but in "my experience of a few decades in large format photography" I have seen WAY more multi coated Symmar-S then I have seen signal caoted Symmar -S lenses. Now Symmars are a different story.