+1 for Richard's advice about Bob Watkins and his service, and also if you might like to visit as I have 3-4 times.
+1 for Richard's advice about Bob Watkins and his service, and also if you might like to visit as I have 3-4 times.
Last edited by JMO; 10-Apr-2019 at 17:41.
... JMOwens (Mt. Pleasant, Wisc. USA)
"If people only knew how hard I work to gain my mastery, it wouldn't seem so wonderful at all." ...Michelangelo
Previously mentioned:
"Have one of the first five 110mm & 150mm SSXL imported to the US. The technical sales guy told the story of this first group of SSXL having hand ground all glass Aspheric elements, about the late 1990's. This was due the demand on delivery and technical problems with making the uber-precise moulded Aspherical element for production. It appears the problems with the 110mm SSXL corresponds with the time-frame when Schneider made the change from hand ground Aspheric to uber-precision moulded Aspheric element. This appears to have happened about 2000 or ?
The two (110mm & 150mm) first hand built Aspheric element lenses from this batch of SSXLs here has never had any problems, they are both excellent performers in every way. As for light fall off, this is a problem inherent in wide angle LF lenses, the solution is apply the proper center filter and continue on."
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...e-Serial-Range
Bernice
My 110mm lost its ability to focus. No matter where I placed the lens it wouldn't focus. So eventually I had to send it from Australia to California and the official Schneider factory. They re-cemented it and cleaned it etc. As far as I know it is still OK (I haven't used it in a while...) but I will admit to being a little apprehensive every time I take it out.
I'm not actually very confident about Schneider in general with this lens and the Shneideritis and all ...
Fujinons develop Fuji-itis, which is much the same as Schneideritis, appears to be much lesser discussed due to the popularity of Fujinon LF lenses?
This problem of _itis appears to be failure of the lens element edge coating, not the same as lens adhesive failure and does not have the same optical effects as adhesive failure which can be serious compared to lens element edge coating failure which is mostly minor to not much effect at all.
*Not proper to single out Schneider for problem of this sort as they are not the only ones with optics that have developed this problem.
As for edge coating, there are a large number of Zeiss microscope eye pieces and other microscope optics that do not have any kind of edge coating-treatment... and there years of Zeiss microscope production with optical adhesive failure across their entire offering of production of microscope optics. This is well known among microscope enthusiast-collectors.
Bernice
Originally Posted by swmcl
So...
Would it seem safe to buy a clean lens and expect it to continue that way?
I see lots of edge coating problems in Fuji lenses. Both mine have it, as do many I see for sale on the auction site. I haven't looked as closely at other brands because I've mostly been shopping for Fujinon. Anyway, I don't notice any impact from the problem.
Nobody (other than perhaps Schneider, and they're not talking) has hard data on the behavior over time of a representative sample of these lenses, that would enable us to know what the odds of further trouble actually are at this point. The "if it's lasted this long without a problem it's likely to be fine" reasoning is plausible, but there's no way to know for sure. So it's a matter of how risk-averse you are, how much money you'd have at stake, and how badly you want a lens with those exact specifications.
Bernice,
I respect you and what you've said in response to my post.
However, if I may speak to issues in another way...
I have a Nikkor zoom lens, an 80-200 f2.8. I have had a bunch of fungus issues with my 35mm gear lately and wanted things looked at. The official Nikon dealer in my state capital of Brisbane looked at the lens which also had a focus problem and told me it was unable to be repaired. The focus ring wouldn't turn properly and there was a bunch of condensate in the front element. Along with other lenses, one of which was a heavily fungus infected 135mm f2 specialty lens, they wanted me to essentially replace my lenses with new product at extreme cost.
I managed to find a guy who repaired camera equipment in the same city. A guy who has been doing his thing from a basement at his home for 40 years. He took all my affected lenses and cleaned them. Now they are like new.
The focusing problem was because Nikon stuck a circuit board inside the lens with a double-sided tape !! The tape failed and the pcb prevented the focus mechanism from working correctly. The Dutchman who repaired the lens glued it into place with a reliable Locktite product. He reckons it will now never fail. The dishonest Nikon authorised agent is completely discredited.
The reality is that my hard-earned dollars do not buy me product maturity (both design and manufacture) at any price. What on earth was Nikon thinking ? Why is it that a very costly Schneider lens cant be glued with stable glues ? The risk of poor product can never be eliminated no matter how much we pay. Yet we expect so much more from our shining lights on the hill. They could eliminate many of these issues for the cost of a better glue or paint etc. in the first place and they've been at the game for long enough to know what works and what doesn't or shouldn't. The desire for a quick or recurring buck is all that people and companies want.
Rgds.
Fair question. Synthetic cement problems afflicted a number of lens makers. In particular, Rodenstock and Voigtlaender lenses made from (guess, the start date may be later) the late 1950s to the early 1970s (another guess) suffer separations. I have a small pile of Apo-Skopars and a 58/5.6 Grandagon with severe "rings of fire."
I b'lieve, might be mistaken, that when the makers didn't know that their new adhesives would be troublesome. And I suspect that they didn't do accelerated life testing.
About Schneideritis. I'm a fan of Boyer lenses, have a pile. It should be called Boyeritis.
Your Nikon story is appalling. Nikon is a member of the Mitsubishi group. My father spent some time with Mitsubishi Electric's turbine generator group in the early '50s, teaching them Westinghouse trade secrets. He came home very impressed with Mitsubishi's adoption of "Deming thought." That Nikon seems to have abandoned Deming's ideas is very upsetting.
Indeed, some people could get sleeping disorder from it.
But back to the OP's question. The answer is that the glue was an innovative product and did not have the historical time behind it before it started to be used. And no, not everything can be tested on artificial ageing. Even manufacturers learn from their mistakes. You too have learned to walk that way. That's how progress works. Looking at the process 50 year later you should not say - why didn't they know it like we do today? Because we have learned it thanks to them! So, instead of complaining - send a letter of thanks to Schneider! And buy their lenses!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks