How much should Schneideritis affect the price of a lens? [Archive]

Noah A

20-Mar-2012, 14:57

I bought a used 120/8 Super Angulon on this very forum (as a backup to my 115 Grandagon, which needs a shutter repair and is worthy of a backup since it's the lens I use 75% of the time). It was stated to be optically perfect and "like new". However once I received it I noticed it was not as described.

It has two small coating marks on the front, the mounting flange is scratched up and, perhaps most importantly, it has the dreaded schneideritis. It's mostly on the smaller elements at the back of the front lens section. I know this is said not to affect image quality, but I know it affects resale value.

Before I decide what to do about the lens, I'm wondering, in general, how much Schneideritis should affect the price of a lens?

ic-racer

20-Mar-2012, 15:31

None?

Lachlan 717

20-Mar-2012, 15:33

Are you a collector or a user?

If the former, somewhat; if the latter, probably none whatsoever.

Noah A

20-Mar-2012, 16:21

I'm a user. But in nearly every thread that discusses this issue, it's mentioned that the condition affects resale value. I'm just looking for opinions on how much.

Frank Petronio

20-Mar-2012, 17:02

I think it matters. If a mint 120/8 goes for $400 then one with Schneideristis but otherwise mint should be $100 less, 25% - seems about right to me.

I'd probably pay 10% less for a Caltar and 10% more for a Sinar/Linhof-selected version.

I'd pay 10% more a newer black Compur over a Copal shutter, and 20-25% more for a recent CLA. I'd pay 10% less for a Prontor or Sieko shutter. I'd pay 25-50% less if it looked like the lens was remounted into a different, odd shutter with sketchy or missing aperture scales.

For each cosmetic ding I'd take 10% off. If the glass has cleaning marks I'd subtract 25%. If the aperture blades are oily that's 25-50% off. If it needs a CLA to run or has filter ring dings I'd take 50% off or at least as much as the CLA would cost, $100-plus.

I currently use an old Schneider-made Caltar with Schneideritis and sticky-oily aperture blades mounted in a Polaroid Prontor without aperture scales. The glass has cleaning marks and the body has numerous scuffs and a filter ring ding. The previous owner of this lens gave me $50 to take it! haha

BrianShaw

20-Mar-2012, 17:10

Noah, it depends a lot upon how much you paid. if you paid a premium price it might matter more than if ou bought it for a low-ball price.

Noah A

20-Mar-2012, 17:16

I paid $450 since it was supposedly mint...

BrianShaw

20-Mar-2012, 17:23

Well, I don't quite know what else to say. Frank's formulas seem OK to me but having a number of lenses with Schneideritis I can attest to the fact that it seems to have no affect on images. I don't really know the fair market value of the 120. At $450, though, I'd need a stiff drink to get over it. Actually, that's what I'd do if I were in your shoes: a nice glass of Jameson or Maker's Mark and then forget about it. Think of it this way -- it is an older lens and 99% will have some degree of schneideritis. Good luck with whatever you choose to do.

cdholden

20-Mar-2012, 17:48

I think Frank put too much effort into it, but I don't disagree with any of it.
Brian's recommendation of Makers Mark is an excellent choice.
Personally, I'd return it if I had been lied to. It clearly isn't perfect or like new. That's more than just an accidental oversight. I had a similar experience last year. I hate when people try to do business like that. It isn't difficult to be honest and fair.

Steve Hamley

20-Mar-2012, 18:01

This is almost a "troll" post. No correct answer.

Cheers, Steve

BrianShaw

20-Mar-2012, 18:18

I agree that there is no definitive answer, but I wouldn't call it a 'troll post". It seems like a sincere question about a very difficult and prickly situation.

If nothing else, though, it might inspire someone to write in iPhone app using Frank's LF lens buying formulas!

Shen45

20-Mar-2012, 18:26

Noah have you taken any images yet with the lens? Unless you have it is currently a collectors piece or a piece of man jewellery.
The other point to consider - if you are displeased with your lens what reaction have you had from the seller when you contacted him about it?

jayabbas

20-Mar-2012, 18:39

Museum piece - pay the price and be ever so vigilant ; User glass - get it inexpensive and send photons by the billions through it. I love my " not to worry about" glass.

Leigh

20-Mar-2012, 18:56

cdholden

20-Mar-2012, 19:24

Why do you think you would be flamed? it's just your purchasing decisions based on fact. It's hard to dispute this part of Schneider's history for those that have held it in their hands.

Frank Petronio

20-Mar-2012, 20:33

I'd insist the original seller gives you a full refund plus all shipping costs both ways. Then I'd settle on a $150 partial refund. That isn't a popular lens these days and $450 for a nice one is too much, so when you add the Schneideritis you'd be lucky to get $300 for it if you sold it.

I'm sure there are higher and lower examples out there and don't follow the prices, that's just my gut.

The one thing I know is that mint is like new and having a star field of paint flakes ain't new.

Alan Gales

20-Mar-2012, 21:04

I purchased my really nice Fujinon 250mm f/6.7 lens off Ebay for $75 to $100 cheaper than I have seen similar copies go for due to a slight bit of "Sneideritis". Either that or I just got lucky! :D

Noah A

21-Mar-2012, 06:01

"..troll"? "a piece of man jewellery[sic]"? Really? My inquiry was sincere, and thanks to those of you who offered good advice.

I probably spend more time actually photographing than 90% of the people on this forum. It's my job. I also use my equipment hard and I'm not a collector. This year alone I've lugged my gear to Mumbai and Mexico City and have trips planned to Lagos and Cairo. I'm not a collector, not that there's anything wrong with collectors.

Despite all that, I don't like being ripped off or taken advantage of. I don't mind a non-pristine lens and as some have mentioned, a beater piece of kit can be more fun since it's value is already shot, you can use it without worrying about it too much. But I feel like I didn't pay for a beater, I paid for an optically perfect and mechanically like-new lens, so I wanted some opinions on how the imperfections would affect the value.

I've offered the seller two options, a return for refund including return shipping or a $150 credit, at frank's suggestion. We'll see how it goes...

turtle

21-Mar-2012, 06:33

Good luck Noah. I would do the same. I also take photos, but like to know that I won't lose out money if I decide to move on a lens because of someone else's inaccurate description.

Its not about performance. Its about whether Noah will end up a few hundred dollars worse off when he sells or could have bought a lens in that condition for $150 less!!!!

rdenney

21-Mar-2012, 08:50

I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but that's OK.

I won't buy ANY Schneider lens, regardless of condition, because of the Schneideritis problem.

My concern is not with the problem itself.
It's the fact that the company ignores a problem that's so common and has been around so long that it has a name.

If this is an example of their concern for their product quality and their customers, I don't want to deal with them.

- Leigh

Leigh, it's a tough way to live. I know people who have been offended for one reason or another by Rodenstock, and won't buy from them. Pretty soon, folks will have to grind their own lenses to avoid offending themselves. Given that Schneider neither sees nor profits from the secondary sale on the used market, one wonders who is being punished.

I own both Rodenstock and Schneider lenses, and none have failed to deliver superb performance. Of my six Schneider lenses, only one shows sufficient Schneideritis to have attracted my attention, and it's a very old Symmar Convertible.

While in my experience it does not affect performance, it does affect resale value, so I expect a lens with Schneideritis to be appropriately priced. I've gotten some good deals on great glass that way. Noah is doing the right thing.

Rick "noting that it took Rodie a few years to solve the element separation problem on old Grandagons--a problem that does affect performance" Denney

E. von Hoegh

21-Mar-2012, 09:14

I paid $450 since it was supposedly mint...

OK. "Mint" is perfect, unused, with box, papers, etc. Schneideritis isn't mint. Return the lens, or get some $$ back. It was misrepresented, it really is that simple.

Schneideritis is actually a good thing. It lets you know that you have the genuine article, and it lowers the price. This is good when buying, bad when selling. And, if it really bugs you that much, you can take the lens apart and repaint the edges of the elements!!

Noah A

21-Mar-2012, 13:29

... At $450, though, I'd need a stiff drink to get over it. Actually, that's what I'd do if I were in your shoes: a nice glass of Jameson or Maker's Mark and then forget about it. ...

I prefer Laphroaig, and I'm having a bit right now! The seller said I could return the lens if I pay shipping both ways, which is pricey since it was an overseas transaction. He threatened to block his paypal account (is that even possible?) if I try to make a claim. Honestly I don't know if it's worth the trouble. I did shoot some test sheets, but I discovered something else this week. None of the labs in my city do E6 anymore! And my normal lab in NJ is having problems with their E6 line and it won't be up until next week. So my test sheets are on their way to Samys.

Have any of you been through the paypal claims process? I'm a bit worried about it becoming a long, drawn out process. And frankly I'm afraid to return the lens since I may end up with no lens and no money.

So, for now, Back to the Laphroaig...

BrianShaw

21-Mar-2012, 14:46

Have any of you been through the paypal claims process? I'm a bit worried about it becoming a long, drawn out process. And frankly I'm afraid to return the lens since I may end up with no lens and no money.

I have, but the circumstances wre a bit different: nondelivery after payment. The process was easy an drather quick. I had a list of my attempts to contact the seller and his response the one time I spoke with him. I understand that he was having problems getting hte part from a supplier but when asked to admit he can't fill the order and return funds he just stoped communicating. Paypal returned my money with no questions asked in less than 10 days. If I were in a position to have an item that needed to be returned prior to resolution I would pay whatever it takes to get indiputable proof that the item/package was delivered and accepted by the seller. And I would document the condition of the contents prior to packaging.

Alan Gales

21-Mar-2012, 14:48

I'm a small time Ebay Seller. PayPal really favors the buyer so I wouldn't worry about having trouble getting your money back if that is what you wish. How long it will take, I don't know. I only filed a claim once myself as a buyer and the seller immediately refunded my money.

Juergen Sattler

21-Mar-2012, 15:41

The seller cannot "block" his paypal account - he is just threatening you - which would give me even more incentive to get my money back from that guy!

Leigh

21-Mar-2012, 15:45

And my normal lab in NJ is having problems with their E6 line and it won't be up until next week. So my test sheets are on their way to Samys.
Noah,

Permit me to suggest Dodge Chrome in Silver Spring, Maryland. Absolute top quality shop for both wet and digital.

They do my chromes in 4x5 and 8x10 with outstanding results.

They have an excellent b&w negative line using Ilford DD developer.
They also do b&w printing, but I've never tried it since I do my own.

www.dodgechrome.com

- Leigh

Leigh

21-Mar-2012, 15:50

The seller cannot "block" his paypal account - he is just threatening you - which would give me even more incentive to get my money back from that guy!
He can "block" his paypill account by taking all of the money out of it. Of course that will get them pissed off.

I agree with Juergen... You should file a paypill claim immediately, since the window for doing so is rather short.

- Leigh

Leigh

21-Mar-2012, 16:10

Leigh, it's a tough way to live.
Hi Rick,

Not really. I'm involved in several different industries. I apply the same criteria in all of them.

If a product line has a problem, the manufacturer should correct it. No excuses, no bull.

I apply the same criteria to my own operations.
If one of my products had a persistent problem, and a manager suggested we ignore it, I'd fire his ass on the spot.

- Leigh

Alan Gales

21-Mar-2012, 16:10

Like I said, I'm a small time Ebay Seller. I have never had a problem with a Buyer. If I sold you something that was not right I would refund all of your money including all your shipping costs even though according to Ebay I don't have to refund shipping. It's called integrity.

This guy sounds like a real jerk. If you do end up filing a claim, after I received my money back I would list his name on this forum to warn others not to buy from him.

Leigh

21-Mar-2012, 16:13

If I sold you something that was not right I would refund all of your money including all your shipping costs even though according to Ebay I don't have to refund shipping. It's called integrity.
Absolutely right.

You'd be amazed how few sellers can even spell 'integrity' these days, much less know what it means.

- Leigh

Noah A

22-Mar-2012, 06:23

I filed a claim with paypal so we'll see how it goes. I'm leaning towards keeping the lens but I'd like a little compensation.

By the way, if anyone is curious, I emailed Schneider in the US and was told that the out-of-warranty cost to re-paint the lens elements would be $180 per cell. I'll certainly post the name of the seller once it is resolved, but in the meantime I'd rather not.

In terms of the Schneideritis issue itself, I was under the impression that this was not covered under warranty. But my email from John mentioned returning the lens with the receipt and warranty info so that seems to imply that they'd cover it if it was under warranty.

From the serial number it seems like the lens is from 1984...

Noah A

22-Mar-2012, 06:31

Noah,

Permit me to suggest Dodge Chrome in Silver Spring, Maryland. Absolute top quality shop for both wet and digital.

They do my chromes in 4x5 and 8x10 with outstanding results.

They have an excellent b&w negative line using Ilford DD developer.
They also do b&w printing, but I've never tried it since I do my own.

www.dodgechrome.com

- Leigh

Thanks Leigh. I don't usually shoot chromes, though my normal lab, Taylor Photo near Princeton, NJ, does a great job on E6 as well. But last week when I was in they had a sign that their E6 line was down, and I saw a guy holding a big chain in his hand from the machine!

But I was assured it's a temporary maintenance issue. I normally shoot C-41, Portra 160 to be exact. I had purchased a box of E100G to test for a possible project, but once I heard it was discontinued I figured it was a dead-end and not worth starting a project with. Instead I figured it would be great for testing lenses since it would be easier to judge color and falloff on a chrome than a neg.

I wanted to compare the sharpness, color and light falloff of the 120SA vs my beloved 115 Grandagon. If it measures up I'll use it as a backup or secondary kit (maybe use it with my Technika kit, since the added 12mm or so of flange distance would be a real benefit with that camera). If it doesn't measure up, I'll sell it on, which is why I'm concerned about resale value and getting a fair price.

Dominique Cesari

22-Mar-2012, 09:12

I have in mind that Schneider stated (but where ?) that schneideritis affects the image in an objectionnable way when it covers 50% of the surface visible inside the cells. So, at that point the value of the lens would be cut by more than 50%, say 70%. But 50% of the surface is enormous. I have a lens which is covered of say 20% (it's very difficult to convert visual impression in percentage) and it's yet very much. No visible effect on the image (though a subtle continuous degradation with the time going on is not easy to monitor). I'm conscious that this lens would be difficult to sell and a discount of 40% would be a good deal. For discret schneideiriris 5/10 % seems the rate. Most of the Schneider lenses older than 20 years that I own or have had in hands and some Fujinon show some schneideritis and part of them quite a lot, and among the one I kept, it expanded noticeably.

BrianShaw

22-Mar-2012, 10:54

I have in mind that Schneider stated (but where ?) that schneideritis affects the image in an objectionnable way when it covers 50% of the surface visible inside the cells.

I wish you could recall where/when that was said Lots of us would be interested to see that, especially in writing. I have a 210 that has about 50% (maybe more) visible Schneideritis and haven't noticed any degredation. Maybe that's a result of my predilection toward old uncoated Tessar and soft-focus lenses... who knows?

Noah A

22-Mar-2012, 11:01

My email from John at Schneider said that "a few spots here and there" won't affect optical quality. I have a heck of a lot more than that. But it's hard to judge really since they're on the small elements at the back of the front lens cell. Many of the bubbles have joined together to form larger light areas.