Does Shneideritis get worse over time? Is it worth it to buy a lens that has the defect ?
Does Shneideritis get worse over time? Is it worth it to buy a lens that has the defect ?
One would expect so, since it didn't leave the factory that way.
It appears to be a defect in the aluminum anodizing, but that's based solely on reports of others.
I do not buy any Schneider lenses due to the existence of Schneideritis, but that's a personal decision.
- Leigh
If you believe you can, or you believe you can't... you're right.
Of course it's well worth to buy lenses with this "defect". It has no real effect on the picture you could discern.
My concern is not the Schneideritis itself, which does not affect the photo.
If Schneider chooses to ignore a problem that has existed for decades, and is so common that it has a name...
What other defects do they choose to ignore that we're not aware of because they're less obvious?
- Leigh
If you believe you can, or you believe you can't... you're right.
Whenever I inquire about a lens being sold with the defect it is always stated that there is no effect on image quality. But lenses are made with non reflective black inside for a reason . They don't make them with little silver dots in there for the same reason . Some of the lenses are offered at very good prices though .
I've never noticed any difference in image quality with a lens that has Schneider-itis; the only difference is the lower selling price.
Leigh, schneideritis isn't due to failed anodizing, it is due to poor adhesion of the black paint applied to elements' edges. In spite of the name, it occurs with other makers' lenses. For example, most of my Boyer lenses have bad cases. But not all, and there's a problem. It isn't clear what factors besides the edge blacking material -- surface treatment before application? glass type? relative humidity when the blacking was applied? ... -- make it happen
I'm inclined to think that "WE ARE RIGHT AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANTHING! IF THERE IS A PROBLEM IT IS THE CUSTOMER'S!" is a disease that afflicts mainly German manufacturers. VW, BMW and E. Leitz and successors come to mind.
Lenses from a number of makers have problems with early synthetic adhesives -- Rodenstock and Voigtlaender, in particular -- too. These defects, like schneideritis, took years post-manufacture to manifest themselves, and not all lenses made with the "bad" adhesive develop them. Perhaps lens makers should try accelerated life testing before releasing lenses made with new materials even though I've never understood the chemistry behind it.
As a matter of practical interest, Leigh, which makes of LF lenses do you use?
I've also seen it on older Fuji lenses; Fuji-itis.
Hi Dan,
Back when I was shooting chromes, I learned that the best color fidelity across the lens set was achieved
by standardizing on one brand and lens series.
Although I only shoot B&W now, I still adhere to that principle.
My main lenses are ...
Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S (all seven available FLs from 120/5.6 through 300/5.6), plus
Rodenstock Apo-Macro-Sironar-S 180/5.6,
Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-W 210/5.6.
Others are ...
Nikkor SW 65/4 and 75/4,
Fujinon SWD 90/5.6 (this is a marvelous lens),
Fujinon SW 105/8 (250mm IC; very hard to find a 105 that covers 4x5 with movements),
Nikkor W 240/5.6 and 360/6.5,
Nikkor M 300/9 and 450/9,
Goerz Gold Dot Dagor 8-1/4"/6.8 (a real one, made in Switzerland).
There may be a couple of others floating around, but those listed are the ones I use.
There are also Rodenstock Sironar-N 150/5.6 and 210/5.6 that I'm trying to sell.
- Leigh
If you believe you can, or you believe you can't... you're right.
Bookmarks