PDA

View Full Version : RE: Schneideritis



Greg
20-Sep-2017, 16:38
OK... so how much does the seeming ever present to some degree Schneideritis to (older?) Schneider lenses effect their performance? Rodenstockitis, Zeissitis, and Nikkoritis seem to never be mentioned.

I've used (and still use) several vintage lenses with plenty of xxxxitis, subjectively without effecting the images they throw. Most of my exposures made a f/45 and f/64.... is the effect of Schneideritis less felt at these small apertures?

BrianShaw
20-Sep-2017, 17:36
My 210 Symmar-S has a considerable amount of Schneideritis (more than the 300 that SepiaReverb is selling) and I've never been able to see any affect on the images. Most of my exposure is at bigger apertures.

Ari
20-Sep-2017, 17:57
No effect on IQ, just on resale value.
And there's Fuji-itis as well.

Mark Sampson
20-Sep-2017, 19:04
I'm tempted to say that Jos. Schneider & Co. designed it in, purely and simply to afflict the anal-retentive perfectionists among us (you know who you are). But I don't know that for sure, so I won't.

BrianShaw
20-Sep-2017, 19:55
Yes... it's a feature, not a flaw... I read that on the internet!

:o

neil poulsen
22-Sep-2017, 09:35
My 210 Symmar-S has a considerable amount of Schneideritis (more than the 300 that SepiaReverb is selling) and I've never been able to see any affect on the images. Most of my exposure is at bigger apertures.

My 180mm Symmar-S is moderately afflicted. Yet, I'm a skeptic that this doesn't have an affect. How would one know, unless a side-by-side comparison were done with pairs of lenses in the same focal length. (One afflicted, and one not.) I mean really, all that reflected light dancing around inside the lens?

If it were to have an affect, I suspect that it would be in overall flare. In small quantities, I think this would be hard to detect without having a control image (from a non-afflicted lens) against which to compare.

One of these days, I'll swap out my 180mm for something more recent . . . and not afflicted.

Bob Salomon
22-Sep-2017, 09:41
I'm tempted to say that Jos. Schneider & Co. designed it in, purely and simply to afflict the anal-retentive perfectionists among us (you know who you are). But I don't know that for sure, so I won't.

Jos. Schneider or Schneider Kreuznach? Two different companies. The second succeeded the first after it went bankrupt.

Mark Sampson
22-Sep-2017, 11:19
Sorry Bob, I was being facetious... not always a good idea on the internet. Of course I don't believe that any iteration of the Schneider lens companies 'designed in' that little flaw, if indeed it is a flaw.
I've worked with quite a few Schneider lenses in my career, in some rather demanding applications, and have never been dis-satisfied with any of them. Nor have I ever seen any effects,positive or negative, that I could trace to whatever 'Schneideritis' is.
Perhaps someone will find two otherwise identical lenses and run a test. Good luck with that- and do post your results! While someone runs that test, I'll be out making photographs with my 1957 121/8 Super-Angulon, Schneideritis and all.

xkaes
22-Sep-2017, 11:57
I'm a skeptic that this doesn't have an affect. How would one know, unless a side-by-side comparison were done with pairs of lenses in the same focal length. (One afflicted, and one not.) I mean really, all that reflected light dancing around inside the lens?

OMG! I just checked, and I'm afflicted with Fujiitis!! Here is my Fujinon A 180mm f9.

170150

I'm starting to feel itchy already! I'm heading out to the pharmacy to get some Valium and Sleeping pills right now!

I may never sleep or shoot again!

David A. Goldfarb
22-Sep-2017, 12:46
It's better to reduce internal reflections in a lens than not, but then how many people always use a bellows shade at maximum extension to reduce the image circle to the minimum needed for the image in question after applying movements and focusing? I would say that if one doesn't use a bellows shade, one isn't in a position to complain about the anti-reflective paint flaking off the bezels of lens elements.

Pere Casals
22-Sep-2017, 12:51
OK... so how much does the seeming ever present to some degree Schneideritis to (older?) Schneider lenses effect their performance? Rodenstockitis, Zeissitis, and Nikkoritis seem to never be mentioned.

I've used (and still use) several vintage lenses with plenty of xxxxitis, subjectively without effecting the images they throw. Most of my exposures made a f/45 and f/64.... is the effect of Schneideritis less felt at these small apertures?

The black paint inside the lens is intended to reduce stray light in some conditions. If white paint was used instead black you would notice an increase of stray light (non image forming light). At the end the dots from schneideritis have an small total surface, so no increase in stray light can be noticed. If a large share of the inner surface was peeled off, sun was not in the framming but still bathing the glass, and no lens hood was used... then some increase of stray light would be noticed.

Jac@stafford.net
22-Sep-2017, 12:55
I have read the rationales and justifications for Schneideritis for decades and regardless I cannot fathom how they let it proliferate for so long. If it causes no harm, then why didn't other makers allow Schneideritis in order to make manufacturing cheaper? And has anyone compared a fair sample of Schneider lenses with and without Schneideritis? I think not.

To me it is a shame. WTF?

Andy Eads
22-Sep-2017, 14:58
I've pulled a few bargain Schneider lenses apart to clean them up. What I found was the black paint isn't paint but a stretchy coating. I suspect the coating eventually develops small holes where it contacts a sharp spot on the glass edge. As said in earlier posts, the holes are very small areas and likely have no discernable effect on the image. I suspect Schneider didn't do anything about the problem because it had no effect and the holes are just that, holes and not flakes. I brushed the old Kodak "Brushing Black" lacquer over the spots to make the lenses appear perfect. - Andy

Jac@stafford.net
22-Sep-2017, 15:22
I suspect Schneider didn't do anything about the problem because it had no effect and the holes are just that, holes and not flakes.

I suspect that Schneider has gone into automatic mode with no engineers on staff. The production 'bots are taking orders from the bean counters.
.

Randy
25-Sep-2017, 08:46
It's best to never store an affected lens near a non affected lenses, as it does spread.

plaubel
25-Sep-2017, 09:08
And then the result may be a tiny Rod Schneiditis :-)

Pere Casals
25-Sep-2017, 12:30
It's best to never store an affected lens near a non affected lenses, as it does spread.

Randy, IMHO this is for fungus affected lenses, fungus do spread. A lens with fungus needs desinfectation.

IMHO Schneideritis is simply the black paint separating from the walls, and this is not contagious.

xkaes
25-Sep-2017, 12:40
Just as you can't cure a fungal infection with an antibiotic, you first treat inflammation, an "-ITIS", with an anti-inflammatory drug, such as Ibuprofen, or in extreme cases, a steroid. Then after determining the cause of the inflammation, you can select an appropriate cure -- from a plaster cast to some black paint.

LabRat
25-Sep-2017, 20:54
Apply a little India ink over the afflicted area if is on an edge of an element... Thinner than paint...

Steve K

plaubel
26-Sep-2017, 01:20
Regarding "Schneideritis", no fungus comes in play.
Real Schneideritis seems to be a bit more than only missig some colour.
What I have seen are spots between the colour (which seems to be , as said before, more a coating than a painting) and the glass, but the coatings themselves has been fine.
This eventually means that this coating reacts in anyway with the glass over the time.
This further may result in real spots in the coating.

Once I had to open an Angulon with rattling lenscells, and this are some impressions from inside:

170240

170241

So far, and well known, too.
But in looking from another perspective, I would not say that Schneideritis isn't causing problems in some cases:
170242
Sorry for the lack of sharpness there..

Unfortunately the client didn't want me uncoating and restoring the black coating, and he has not tried this lens after my "CLA"- but I really expect some problems and a second opening of the Angulon.

Ritchie

plaubel
26-Sep-2017, 01:26
Regarding "Schneideritis", no fungus comes in play.
Real Schneideritis seems to be a bit more than only missig some colour.
What I have seen are spots between the colour (which seems to be , as said before, more a coating than a painting) and the glass, but the coatings themselves has been fine.
This eventually means that this coating reacts in anyway with the glass over the time.
This further may result in tiny holes .

Once I had to open an Angulon with rattling lenscells, and this are some impressions from inside:

170240

170241

So far, and well known.
But in looking from another perspective, I would not say that Schneideritis isn't causing problems in some cases:
170242

Unfortunately the client didn't want decoating me the black coating, and he has not tried this lens after my restoring - but I really expect some problems.

Ritchie

sepiareverb
26-Sep-2017, 12:50
My 210 Symmar-S has a considerable amount of Schneideritis (more than the 300 that SepiaReverb is selling) and I've never been able to see any affect on the images. Most of my exposure is at bigger apertures.

Nor have I seen it affect things on that 300.


No effect on IQ, just on resale value.
And there's Fuji-itis as well.

And Minoltaitis, I had a Minolta 28 lens in M mount for many years, from the CLE, that also had lots of spots around the edge that I never could see an effect from either.