View Full Version : Schneider 550 Lens and Caps; Effect on Coating
Richard K.
13-Apr-2010, 07:05
I have acquired a Shneider Fine Art 550 mm lens. This uses metal screw in caps front and back. While they are lovely, they are heavy, take a while to unscrew and rescrew and can even seize if overtightened. Not the ideal in the field! I would use them for display and storage but would prefer a nice slip-on plastic or rubber cap for the field. I wrote Schneider, Germany and they initially told me there isn't a plastic cap to fit. I then noticed that the 360 mm Symmar S also has 125 mm external barrel diameter and e-mailed them back about using that. Here is their reply:
>you are right, the old lens cap of our Symmar-S will fit the 550 XXL lens.
>The reason for not recommending this lens cap is the fact that at this
>big diameter the centre plastic part will touch the front lens and scratch
>the coating when moving as also change the color of the coating when
>placed a long time in the box.
What do you think? Has anybody here ever worried about the coatings being affected by a lens cap? What would be the mechanism and does this apply to all lenses with slip on plastic caps?
I'm thinking that if I'm careful I might be OK with the Symmar caps (if I can even get them!) or maybe possibly have something made by Grimes. But that might be as heavy as what's already there! Thoughts?
Mark Stahlke
13-Apr-2010, 07:47
I recommend lens caps from S. K. Grimes. (http://www.skgrimes.com/caps/index.htm)
When I bought an SSXL 150 I set it on a shelf (front element down) for a week or so. The next time I looked at the lens there was an imprint of the lens cap serial number from the inside of the cap on the front element. The imprint was some sort of oil or silicon residue from the lens cap and cleaned up perfectly. No damage done. Yet. This told me the weight of the lens was enough to deform the lens cap to the point where it would contact the front element. I ordered good lens caps immediately. I put that lens back on the shelf (on its side) and didn't touch it again until my S. K. Grimes lens caps arrived.
Your 550 XXL is a very expensive lens. If you value it, get the S. K. Grimes caps and don't look back.
Peter K
13-Apr-2010, 07:51
What do you think? Has anybody here ever worried about the coatings being affected by a lens cap? What would be the mechanism and does this apply to all lenses with slip on plastic caps?
I'm thinking that if I'm careful I might be OK with the Symmar caps (if I can even get them!) or maybe possibly have something made by Grimes. But that might be as heavy as what's already there! Thoughts?
Older slip on lenscaps e. g. for the Super-Angulon 165mm and 210mm where made of wood (?), velvet and leatherette. Such lenscaps are stronger as plastic caps and cannot touch the lens surface. But plastic lenscaps with such a big diameter can be impressed so the surface of the lens can be touched and scratched. Specially if moved at the same time and the filter-thread is short.
Peter
Steve Hamley
13-Apr-2010, 07:57
Ditto mark and Peter; get S.K. Grimes caps.
Cheers, Steve
Depending on the depth of your plastic or rubber cap you could use a DIY solution to your problem. Make a full circle (disk) out of a thinner PVC or aluminum sheet, with the dimension of the inner diameter of your rubber cap and put it on the bottom of the cap. The plastic/aluminum will not allow the rubber to touch the lens even if put head on. You could attach it there with glued soft foam. You will loose the thickness of your plastic/aluminum sheet on the depth of your rubber cap - still, it could be enough to put the cap safely on the lens rim.
Unless, of course, the glass sticks out in front of the lens rim...
Richard K.
13-Apr-2010, 09:28
Thank you all for your very good advice which I will implement immediately if not sooner!!
Now I'm afraid to look at my 150 SSXL...:eek:
"also change the color of the coating when placed a long time in the box."
That's what caught my attention. Is Schneider saying that out-gassing by their (and by inferrence any other) plastic lens cap will affect the coating of the lens if stored for a long period? If so we are all in trouble! I can't imagine that the coating on the XXL series lenses is that much different from any of their other late model lenses. Maybe they are just being ultra conservative with regard to their flagship lens - but sheesh! - makes me want to go un-cap all my lenses! At least they are already laying on their sides. Moral of the story: don't store 'em, - use 'em. Did Adams, Weston et al obsess so over this lens minutiae?
Richard K.
13-Apr-2010, 11:33
...... Did Adams, Weston et al obsess so over this lens minutiae?
LOL I sincerely doubt it! This started off as a practical inquiry - those caps take a (relatively) long time to come off and on and they're heavy and they can bind so can I use plastic slip-ons instead JUST in the field and then the horror began...:eek:
evan clarke
13-Apr-2010, 11:44
OK, you've had it for a while now. But, you're hardly using it, your wife is nagging you about it and you're embarrassed that you bought it. Here's your chance to regain your dignity! By selling it at only a small loss!:D ...Evan Clarke
"also change the color of the coating when placed a long time in the box."
That's what caught my attention. Is Schneider saying that out-gassing by their (and by inferrence any other) plastic lens cap will affect the coating of the lens if stored for a long period? If so we are all in trouble! I can't imagine that the coating on the XXL series lenses is that much different from any of their other late model lenses. Maybe they are just being ultra conservative with regard to their flagship lens - but sheesh! - makes me want to go un-cap all my lenses! At least they are already laying on their sides. Moral of the story: don't store 'em, - use 'em. Did Adams, Weston et al obsess so over this lens minutiae?
While I completely agree with you about Schneider's surprising comment on their plastic lens caps I don't think that the OP's question is about lens minutiae. That it's not a case shows the care Schneider takes about their metal caps for this lens. After all, a lens that costs more than 6,000 $ new must be well protected. I wonder if Adams ever used a lens of this value...:)
Richard K.
13-Apr-2010, 12:47
OK, you've had it for a while now. But, you're hardly using it, your wife is nagging you about it and you're embarrassed that you bought it. Here's your chance to regain your dignity! By selling it at only a small loss!:D ...Evan Clarke
Now where did I hear that before?!?!!? :rolleyes:
Richard K.
13-Apr-2010, 12:50
........After all, a lens that costs more than 6,000 $ new must be well protected. I wonder if Adams ever used a lens of this value...:)
Whew! It's a good thing I bought mine used and nowhere near $6325! :rolleyes: :D
evan clarke
13-Apr-2010, 13:02
I don't suppose that anybody following this thread has a Fuji 450 CM-W they want to let go of??..Evan Clarke
Whew! It's a good thing I bought mine used and nowhere near $6325! :rolleyes: :D
Was it the one for 2,000 you've grabbed?;)
Richard K.
13-Apr-2010, 19:35
I don't suppose that anybody following this thread has a Fuji 450 CM-W they want to let go of??..Evan Clarke
I USED to have one but sold it a year ago...great lens!
Was it the one for 2,000 you've grabbed?;)
I wish! :)
ic-racer
13-Apr-2010, 22:45
I'd just go with the screw on caps. All my Bolex equipment has screw on caps and I don't mind because it is a real high quality feature.
Enough about lens caps, lets see some pictures with that lens ! :)
Enough about lens caps, lets see some pictures with that lens ! :)
That's what I thought as well! I always dreamed of that lens paired with the 1100 and never saw a good offer for a used one. It has been auctioned only twice in 2009 I think. So it's damn seldom to get it used. Anyway, I wonder if it's worth the weight and price.
That's what I thought as well! I always dreamed of that lens paired with the 1100 and never saw a good offer for a used one. It has been auctioned only twice in 2009 I think. So it's damn seldom to get it used. Anyway, I wonder if it's worth the weight and price.
Why do you want to see pictures taken with that lens?? Do you think you'd be able to see an optical difference (on your screen and on a scanned picture!) in comparison with let's say Fujinon 600 C lens? A picture wouldn't say anything about it.
Wonder if it's worth the weight and price? If somebody buys such a lens it's because there isn't any other of that focal length with an image circle of 900mm in a Copal 3 shutter - for them it is worth then. If somebody needs a race car of course it's worth its price - they cannot use a Toyota SUV as such. What is there to wonder about?
" Enough about lens caps, lets see some pictures with that lens! "
Amen to that brother! I propose a shoot-out between Richard's 550 XXL and the Fuji 600 or 24" Red Dot Apo Artar - at, say, high noon in whatever format you think you can handle.
Frank Petronio
14-Apr-2010, 04:53
Why don't you just put an empty filter ring on it for some safety spacing?
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 06:27
Why do you want to see pictures taken with that lens?? Do you think you'd be able to see an optical difference (on your screen and on a scanned picture!) in comparison with let's say Fujinon 600 C lens? A picture wouldn't say anything about it.
Wonder if it's worth the weight and price? If somebody buys such a lens it's because there isn't any other of that focal length with an image circle of 900mm in a Copal 3 shutter - for them it is worth then. If somebody needs a race car of course it's worth its price - they cannot use a Toyota SUV as such. What is there to wonder about?
What GPS said...
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 06:33
" Enough about lens caps, lets see some pictures with that lens! "
Amen to that brother! I propose a shoot-out between Richard's 550 XXL and the Fuji 600 or 24" Red Dot Apo Artar - at, say, high noon in whatever format you think you can handle.
OK, here's what I'll do since (a lot of) some of us have been curious about this...I'll sacrifice 2 sheets of 8x20 film and do an identical photograph with each of the 550 XXL and the Fuji 600 CS with the movements maxed out (full shift and rise) and we'll see if there's anything to see...I don't have a scanner but I'll think of something...just give me till the weekend...:) Anybody curious to see this?
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 06:35
Why don't you just put an empty filter ring on it for some safety spacing?
Another great idea from the LFF! Thanks Frank.
evan clarke
14-Apr-2010, 06:51
Another great idea from the LFF! Thanks Frank.
I have filter rings on all my lenses to 77mm (except my 150ssxl) and can use identical snap caps on everything. I realize this lens is bigger around but it would work very well and would leave an extra layer of protection over the threads...Evan Clarke
evan clarke
14-Apr-2010, 06:54
Why do you want to see pictures taken with that lens?? Do you think you'd be able to see an optical difference (on your screen and on a scanned picture!) in comparison with let's say Fujinon 600 C lens? A picture wouldn't say anything about it.
Wonder if it's worth the weight and price? If somebody buys such a lens it's because there isn't any other of that focal length with an image circle of 900mm in a Copal 3 shutter - for them it is worth then. If somebody needs a race car of course it's worth its price - they cannot use a Toyota SUV as such. What is there to wonder about?
I'd give a testicle for one of these!!..Evan Clarke
Struan Gray
14-Apr-2010, 06:59
I'd give a testicle for one of these!!..Evan Clarke
Whose?
ic-racer
14-Apr-2010, 07:30
Why do you want to see pictures taken with that lens?? If somebody buys such a lens it's because there isn't any other of that focal length with an image circle of 900mm in a Copal 3 shutter -
I think you would agree that a differnece in coverage [between that lens and a 'lesser' lens], either in terms of vignetting or shift/rise, would easily be observed on a computer screen rendition of a photograph.
evan clarke
14-Apr-2010, 07:56
Whose?
Ha! Caught me in the fine print!!!:D
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 08:07
I'd give a testicle for one of these!!..Evan Clarke
Don't be silly, what would we do with a testicle...?? You can't even use it to focus...:D
I think you would agree that a differnece in coverage [between that lens and a 'lesser' lens], either in terms of vignetting or shift/rise, would easily be observed on a computer screen rendition of a photograph.
So you wanted to see a picture made with this beast of 900mm image circle to see that it doesn't vignette as a picture made with a lens of 620mm of coverage?
How sophisticated! :rolleyes:
evan clarke
14-Apr-2010, 08:48
I have an almost mind bending assortment of view cameras and modern lenses and was silly enough to think I was done searching for things. I have this new 11x14 and now I am on the hunt again..growl...Evan Clarke
sanking
14-Apr-2010, 08:56
OK, here's what I'll do since (a lot of) some of us have been curious about this...I'll sacrifice 2 sheets of 8x20 film and do an identical photograph with each of the 550 XXL and the Fuji 600 CS with the movements maxed out (full shift and rise) and we'll see if there's anything to see...I don't have a scanner but I'll think of something...just give me till the weekend...:) Anybody curious to see this?
The Fuji 600 C covers up to 16X20 nicely so the only way you would see much of a difference between its coverage and that of the 550 XXL on 8X20 would be if you made the test using a lot of movement, say several inches of rise or fall.
The major performance advantages of the 550 XXL are, 1) its huge circle of coverage, which gives several inches of movement even on 20X24" format, and 2) its contrast, which is as great, if not greater, than any lens on the market.
Sandy King
Rick Moore
14-Apr-2010, 10:58
So you wanted to see a picture made with this beast of 900mm image circle to see that it doesn't vignette as a picture made with a lens of 620mm of coverage?
How sophisticated! :rolleyes:
Although the web is not generally the place to compare resolutions, there are still lens characteristics that can be discerned. The 550 XXL is a Dagor with four air-glass boundaries, the 600C is a dialyte with eight air-glass boundaries. The differences in contrast and bokeh should be apparent in a side-by-side comparison of negatives made of the same subject under the same conditions.
Although the web is not generally the place to compare resolutions, there are still lens characteristics that can be discerned. The 550 XXL is a Dagor with four air-glass boundaries, the 600C is a dialyte with eight air-glass boundaries. The differences in contrast and bokeh should be apparent in a side-by-side comparison of negatives made of the same subject under the same conditions.
If you think that you can tell from amateur pictures posted on the web that a modern lens is "x" elements in "y" groups design because of a difference in contrast then you're DREAMING...
Although the web is not generally the place to compare resolutions, there are still lens characteristics that can be discerned. The 550 XXL is a Dagor with four air-glass boundaries, the 600C is a dialyte with eight air-glass boundaries. The differences in contrast and bokeh should be apparent in a side-by-side comparison of negatives made of the same subject under the same conditions.
By the way, apples and oranges behave differently even under the same conditions. So do different lenses. A dialyte can have much better contrast -under the same conditions - than a four air-glass boundaries Dagor and vice-versa. Simply because the contrast doesn't only depend on the number of air-glass boundaries but on a number of other factors too - still in the same conditions. Like apples and oranges...
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 11:39
The Fuji 600 C covers up to 16X20 nicely so the only way you would see much of a difference between its coverage and that of the 550 XXL on 8X20 would be if you made the test using a lot of movement, say several inches of rise or fall.
The major performance advantages of the 550 XXL are, 1) its huge circle of coverage, which gives several inches of movement even on 20X24" format, and 2) its contrast, which is as great, if not greater, than any lens on the market.
Sandy King
Good point Sandy. I was going to check my figures and I'm afraid I spoke too soon! According to my quackulations, 8x20 maxed out on my Chamonix with 2" rise and 2" shift would be equivalent to 12x24 camera with IC 682mm, I agree not a real strenuous test! If I repeat the calculation for my 14x17 maxed out at 5.5" fall and 2" shift I get the equivalent of a 25x21 camera with IC 829mm or, vertically the 17x14 becomes a 28x18 with IC 845mm...So, unless I've erred in my computing (can someone check?!?), I will get the best test by using the 14x17 vertically at maximum fall and shift. Even then I'm short of the 900mm coverage! Now, is it worth two sheets of 14x17 to compare? I'll think on it!
My real reason for acquiring a 550 XXL is to have it for an 18x22 camera (I figure if Watkins, at my age, could do it with glass plates and donkeys, I should be able to manage with film and an SUV!) that a friend has agreed to build for me. If he in fact manages, I will be selling both the 8x20 and 14x17...
With the best will I still don't get why anybody would ask you to sacrifice sheets of ULF film to see that the Fuji 600 C lens has much smaller coverage than the 550 Fine Arts beast...
After all, focus it against a wall, see the image circle and take a digi picture of it - so that any Thomas will believe...
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 11:58
With the best will I still don't get why anybody would ask you to sacrifice sheets of ULF film to see that the Fuji 600 C lens has much smaller coverage than the 550 Fine Arts beast...
After all, focus it against a wall, see the image circle and take a digi picture of it - so that any Thomas will believe...
That WOULD be cheaper! :D
But people will have to trust my word and we all know that that's worth 1/1000 of a picture! :rolleyes:
But yes, I'll try to grab a digi from under the dark cloth with both lenses and camera maxed out...by the weekend...I think I'll just tape a newspaper on the wall at the corner of max extension for both lenses...
Thanks GPS; you just saved me $25 or so...
...
Thanks GPS; you just saved me $25 or so...
Oh boy, what a great feeling to be so useful! $25!! Thanks! :D
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 12:11
Oh boy, what a great feeling to be so useful! $25!! Thanks! :D
Hey, in Toronto, that's a coffee and beakfast sandwich for two at Tim Hortons with enough left over for an all you can eat sushi lunch! :D
Monty McCutchen
14-Apr-2010, 12:16
Richard,
My advice which is worth proportionately to the amount of time I have put into it!!!!!
Use the screw on caps. They were designed for it and the lens is FAR too nice and expensive to try and add something that was not designed for it. You are going to be hauling an 18 x 22 camera, an appropriately large tripod, a wonderfully protective blue case for the lens itself, light meter, incredibly big film holder's, and your ever expanding mental burden at having taken on this lunancy--the lens caps are the least of your worries!!
As a 20 x 24 shooter with all of the above in my arsenal I can tell you the screw on caps in regards to the time it takes to remove them or the effort at getting them to the spot of the picture are the smallest of checklist points, of all that goes into shooting this big.
all the best with your efforts,
Monty
evan clarke
14-Apr-2010, 12:18
With the best will I still don't get why anybody would ask you to sacrifice sheets of ULF film to see that the Fuji 600 C lens has much smaller coverage than the 550 Fine Arts beast...
After all, focus it against a wall, see the image circle and take a digi picture of it - so that any Thomas will believe...
Or just accept that the pinnacle of Schneider's taking lenses might be pretty darned good!!:) ..EC
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 12:26
Richard,
My advice which is worth proportionately to the amount of time I have put into it!!!!!
Use the screw on caps. They were designed for it and the lens is FAR too nice and expensive to try and add something that was not designed for it. You are going to be hauling an 18 x 22 camera, an appropriately large tripod, a wonderfully protective blue case for the lens itself, light meter, incredibly big film holder's, and your ever expanding mental burden at having taken on this lunancy--the lens caps are the least of your worries!!
As a 20 x 24 shooter with all of the above in my arsenal I can tell you the screw on caps in regards to the time it takes to remove them or the effort at getting them to the spot of the picture are the smallest of checklist points, of all that goes into shooting this big.
all the best with your efforts,
Monty
Hey Monty...you're absolutely right! :) What was I thinking?!?:eek: Thanks for the epiphany! (I love having those!):)
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 12:27
Or just accept that the pinnacle of Schneider's taking lenses might be pretty darned good!!:) ..EC
I like this last idea the best!:D
Or just accept that the pinnacle of Schneider's taking lenses might be pretty darned good!!:) ..EC
No kidding? Are you sure even without testing?? You like living dangerously, don't you..? :)
sanking
14-Apr-2010, 16:11
My advice which is worth proportionately to the amount of time I have put into it!!!!!
Use the screw on caps. They were designed for it and the lens is FAR too nice and expensive to try and add something that was not designed for it.
Monty
Monty,
I am the person that advised Richard of a potential problem with the screw on caps that came with the lens. My experience with the lens is that the caps can easily get so tight on the lens that it is impossible to unscrew them. In fact, it was my disgust at having the camera set up to take a negative and pulling the lens out and being unable to use it because I could not unscrew the caps that made me receptive to selling it. And this was not the first time it happened. This was such a problem for me that I just assumed all owners of the 550 XXL must be experiencing the same thing.
Also, I would be concerned that in taking the cap off one could accidentally drop the cap on the glass, which might cause some damage.
My advice, which is probably not worth as much as yours, is that Richard fit the lens with some kind of soft protective caps and store the big metal ones until he gets tired of the lens and decides to pass it on to someone else.
Sandy King
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 16:24
Monty,
I am the person that advised Richard of a potential problem with the screw on caps that came with the lens. My experience with the lens is that the caps can easily get so tight on the lens that it is impossible to unscrew them. In fact, it was my disgust at having the camera set up to take a negative and pulling the lens out and being unable to use it because I could not unscrew the caps that made me receptive to selling it. And this was not the first time it happened. This was such a problem for me that I just assumed all owners of the 550 XXL must be experiencing the same thing.
Also, I would be concerned that in taking the cap off one could accidentally drop the cap on the glass, which might cause some damage.
My advice, which is probably not worth as much as yours, is that Richard fit the lens with some kind of soft protective caps and store the big metal ones until he gets tired of the lens and decides to pass it on to someone else.
Sandy King
My head is spinning! I now have a second epiphany; gettting a couple of slip on caps and re-inforcing them is certainly worth it to not have a seizure in the field! As for getting tired of this beautiful lens, I don't think so! I mean I'm prepared to build it a new bigger home (18x22) and I've committed myself to a regimen of exercise and diet to enable me to do this for a little while yet. AND, she is SO BEAUTIFUL!!
BTW Monty, have you experienced any such seizure on your lens?
Hugo Zhang
14-Apr-2010, 16:48
Richard,
We built a 18x22 plate camera two years ago for a nice gentleman and we could do it again. :)
"My head is spinning! I now have a second epiphany"
Jeez! Richard - just enjoy the damned thing! The rest of us, even the sour-pusses, would love to be in you shoes. And for what it's worth; I think Frank had the most practical suggestion for protecting that beauty.
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 17:00
Richard,
We built a 18x22 plate camera two years ago for a nice gentleman and we could do it again.
If my friend defaults on me (he said I could borrow it any time in return for him using the 550 occasionally), I'll get back to you! He shouldn't as we shook hands over a Tim Hortons coffee. In Canada, that's as good as law! :D Hmmm....how much was it with a couple of holders? :rolleyes: :D :rolleyes:
But I need film not a plate so I guess we can forget about it, right?...Right?...Hugo?
jeroldharter
14-Apr-2010, 17:04
Why don't you just put an empty filter ring on it for some safety spacing?
Isn't the diameter of that lens huge? I would think that even a junk filter of that size would cost as much as one SK Grimes lens cap.
Richard K.
14-Apr-2010, 17:12
"My head is spinning! I now have a second epiphany"
Jeez! Richard - just enjoy the damned thing! The rest of us, even the sour-pusses, would love to be in you shoes. And for what it's worth; I think Frank had the most practical suggestion for protecting that beauty.
LOL Sorry, you're absolutely right! It's just that I'm giddy with enjoyment! I've been wanting this lens for a while! I'll be quiet now.....:)
Monty McCutchen
14-Apr-2010, 21:05
Monty,
I am the person that advised Richard of a potential problem with the screw on caps that came with the lens. My experience with the lens is that the caps can easily get so tight on the lens that it is impossible to unscrew them. In fact, it was my disgust at having the camera set up to take a negative and pulling the lens out and being unable to use it because I could not unscrew the caps that made me receptive to selling it. And this was not the first time it happened. This was such a problem for me that I just assumed all owners of the 550 XXL must be experiencing the same thing.
Also, I would be concerned that in taking the cap off one could accidentally drop the cap on the glass, which might cause some damage.
My advice, which is probably not worth as much as yours, is that Richard fit the lens with some kind of soft protective caps and store the big metal ones until he gets tired of the lens and decides to pass it on to someone else.
Sandy King
Sandy,
Wow, that is interesting. No I haven't had that problem, to be honest not even once. Of course now that I know it's possible I'm assuming that it will happen the next time I go out. It's funny I can get pretty absent minded and I am not overly sensitive to gear etc, but for whatever reason knowing I can never afford another one has me acting like I am on a high wire act when I get this lens out to use with the big camera. Although I haven't had the seizure problem that you encountered I do agree that one of my biggest concerns is the weight of the lenscap when it is being removed with the possibility of it hitting the elements. That is what is most concerning to me. I always try to remove the metal caps with the element facing out as though it were taking a picture that way if they do fall they fall away from the elements not down onto the elements. So far my diligence has paid off but I'm with you on the program of worrying about it. Banging this thing around is not really an option at these prices. Thanks for the insight on the seizing up and if I encounter it I'll repost or contact you Sandy to get suggestions.
For me the beauty of this lens as you mentioned earlier is the contrast that it provides for the Pt/Pd work along with it coverage all in a Copal #3. It is my only lens that covers the 20 x 24 that I have in a shutter. All the other lenses I use a Packard for when I need a shutter. The Dallmeyer 8D is its own beast and right now is only a wet plate lens due to not having a front mounted packard. That'll be a while as I (read my wife too) am saturated at purchasing any more photo gear right now--especially in regards to my schedule or lack thereof in regards to producing negatives I'm proud of.
thanks for the heads up,
monty
Frank Petronio
14-Apr-2010, 21:31
Hey Canon sells a clear 125mm filter, you could knock out the glass and have a spacer no problem.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/89382-REG/Canon_BGO5802000_125mm_Clear_Glass_Filter.html
Only $824.95
Don7x17
14-Apr-2010, 22:30
Monty,
I am the person that advised Richard of a potential problem with the screw on caps that came with the lens. My experience with the lens is that the caps can easily get so tight on the lens that it is impossible to unscrew them. In fact, it was my disgust at having the camera set up to take a negative and pulling the lens out and being unable to use it because I could not unscrew the caps that made me receptive to selling it. And this was not the first time it happened. This was such a problem for me that I just assumed all owners of the 550 XXL must be experiencing the same thing.
Also, I would be concerned that in taking the cap off one could accidentally drop the cap on the glass, which might cause some damage.
My advice, which is probably not worth as much as yours, is that Richard fit the lens with some kind of soft protective caps and store the big metal ones until he gets tired of the lens and decides to pass it on to someone else.
Sandy King
I've used Neolube on the threads of the metal caps of the XXL for four years now -- the compound bonds near-permanently to the threads and provides a dry lubrication that does"move" nor flake off nor turn to dust nor come off at all -- you'll have to rub it very hard to see any change... its very hard to remove. You won't hear the aluminum on aluminum sounds that any threads make and you won't see any wear.. And you'll never have a threaded metal lens cap that sticks in the lens...
I've never thought for a moment about dropping the filter onto the element, but that's because I take the filters off holding the lens in normal position - any drop and the metal lens cap just falls 3-4 inches into the pelican case that the 1100 and 550 are kept in.
For those doubters about Neolube -- I used this on the rear element threads of the Nikon 600-800-1200 set since 1992 with no issues and no longer do you hear the aluminum-on-aluminum sound when you change the rear elements. In fact its never had to be replaced. I use it on all my 135mm and 105mm Heliopan filter threads as well, and on sets of Heliopan stepup rings. (I had SK Grimes make a stepup ring for the 550 to the 135mm filter set so you don't have to look for the uncommon 122mm filter size)
Neolube is applied with a 0000 brush on the threads of the cap. Its alcohol based collodial graphite with a bonding agent, and dries permanently within a few seconds. If you can't find the liquid form at your auto parts store, see the website www.p-b-l.com or micro-tools
I have no affilition with Neolube manufacturer nor with P-B-L nor micro-tools.
Also, Richard, the way to get to the edge of the circle is to use indirect displacement. The Arca 8x10 bellows won't allow this, but the Canham 12x20 will permit it. (I don't know which 8x20 ). Its much easier for Sandy with his 20x24. ;-)
Hey Canon sells a clear 125mm filter, you could knock out the glass and have a spacer no problem.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/89382-REG/Canon_BGO5802000_125mm_Clear_Glass_Filter.html
Only $824.95
What the heck? Doesn't he already have a nice metal screw in cap for his lens? Let it bite the lens and then cut the bottom of it and he'll have a nice spacer no problem...:) (Richard, this advice is worth $824.95 so forget your Sushi bar this time...)
evan clarke
15-Apr-2010, 05:40
No kidding? Are you sure even without testing?? You like living dangerously, don't you..? :)
When they brought these two lenses out, Schneider reps brought them to a few conferences and shows and their pride was evident. As far as testing, I'm too old to waste that time. I make negatives and prints, can pretty much afford to throw some paper away and I let the final object decide things for me. I have friends who test, test, test, test, test and then test the tests. They never have any photographs to show!! I still want one of these lenses!!..Evan Clarke:D
...
I have friends who test, test, test, test, test and then test the tests. They never have any photographs to show!! I still want one of these lenses!!..Evan Clarke:D
But of course! :)
Diane Maher
15-Apr-2010, 06:09
I recommend lens caps from S. K. Grimes. (http://www.skgrimes.com/caps/index.htm)
When I bought an SSXL 150 I set it on a shelf (front element down) for a week or so. The next time I looked at the lens there was an imprint of the lens cap serial number from the inside of the cap on the front element. The imprint was some sort of oil or silicon residue from the lens cap and cleaned up perfectly. No damage done. Yet. This told me the weight of the lens was enough to deform the lens cap to the point where it would contact the front element. I ordered good lens caps immediately. I put that lens back on the shelf (on its side) and didn't touch it again until my S. K. Grimes lens caps arrived.
Your 550 XXL is a very expensive lens. If you value it, get the S. K. Grimes caps and don't look back.
The caps that came with my 150 SS-XL have a bit of velvet (or whatever it is) at the center. As far as I know, this is the normal manufacturer's cap for these lenses. I bought it new.
Diane
Richard K.
15-Apr-2010, 06:21
What the heck? Doesn't he already have a nice metal screw in cap for his lens? Let it bite the lens and then cut the bottom of it and he'll have a nice spacer no problem...:) (Richard, this advice is worth $824.95 so forget your Sushi bar this time...)
WOW!! If I knew your advice was this expensive, I wouldn't keep taking it!!:eek:
WOW!! If I knew your advice was this expensive, I wouldn't keep taking it!!:eek:
Well, expensive is relative. With this advice you can also use the cut off original metal lens cap in its double duty - it serves as a lens shade thus enabling you to forget about the Lee lens shade expense... yet another $$$ saving... I want only your good...;)
evan clarke
15-Apr-2010, 06:29
The caps that came with my 150 SS-XL have a bit of velvet (or whatever it is) at the center. As far as I know, this is the normal manufacturer's cap for these lenses. I bought it new.
Diane
I picked mine up in person at Badger Graphics and the cap are regular smooth slip caps! Did you get yours new??...Evan Clarke
Richard K.
15-Apr-2010, 06:31
.....With this advice you can also use the cut off original metal lens cap in its double duty - it serves as a lens shade thus enabling you to forget about the Lee lens shade expense...
It can also serve as a discus if you run into any track and field games, a small manhole cover, a pizza pan...
Richard K.
15-Apr-2010, 06:33
I picked mine up in person at Badger Graphics and the cap are regular smooth slip caps! Did you get yours new??...Evan Clarke
I got mine from Midwest Photo, used, and it has the Velvet stick on thingie...
Mark Stahlke
15-Apr-2010, 06:34
The caps that came with my 150 SS-XL have a bit of velvet (or whatever it is) at the center. As far as I know, this is the normal manufacturer's cap for these lenses. I bought it new.
Diane
Interesting. I bought mine new back in 2006. I ranted (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=17350&highlight=lens+cap+rant) about the lens caps back then. When did you buy yours? Did Schneider change the lens cap design?
Wow. I just read my old thread about the caps. Apparently I set the lens on a shelf on its side not face down. The caps were even worse than I remembered.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.