polyglot... YES... but we can slow the spread of spores to the point that it DOESN'T EFFECT our lenses noticeably.
Keep temperature and humidity LOW!!
Keep temperature and humidity LOW!!
A Beutiful Lens
-
A
- Thread starter graywolf
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Cibachrome Mark II Processing Drum 8"x10"
- Started by logan2z
-
For Sale Mint Nikon AI-s Lenses
- Started by Barlow
-
For Sale Mint Nikon AF Lenses
- Started by Barlow
-
Sold Arca Swiss P0 hybrid classic head - full CLA'd
- Started by Guivd
-
For Sale FS: Ilex Acme #3 Shutter Face Plate, NO Aperture Scale!
- Started by AnselMortensen
Forum statistics
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2005
- Messages
- 742
- Format
- Multi Format
That is not fungus, that is separation caused by the failing of the optical cement Schneider used at the time. I have a lens with a snowflake similar to yours that is deeper in the lens. It does not show up in the images. I am not saying yours won't show up, but mine doesn't.
I think you should return it for something else. I bought a BGN Fujinon 210 a little over a year ago at KEH for just over $100 and it is perfect. Your lens probably wasn't much less than that.
I think you should return it for something else. I bought a BGN Fujinon 210 a little over a year ago at KEH for just over $100 and it is perfect. Your lens probably wasn't much less than that.
Wow, three pages of comments. I want to thank all the folks who posted helpful comments.
In my original post, I was more complaining about all the "I bought a X rated UG from KEH and it was perfect" posts I have seen over the years.
Although, I admit to stupidity in buying this lens, I did not even call to find out what may have been wrong with it. Although, in the past few years the sales people seem to have no more access to the stuff than than we the buyers have, they seem to read the same listing off their computers that we read off their website, not like back when King himself answered the phone. Actually, the shutter is probably worth what I paid for it, so I did not exactly get cheated. On the other hand, I did not get exactly what I expected which was a ratty beat up but working old lens.
I guess that I was so excited about finally having a real view camera to play with, I got carried away. That old Symmar would have given me a pretty good basic lens set to play with. The 135 Optar off my Crown Graphic, and the 210/370 convertible Symmar would be pretty much the same as a 35/50/90 lens set on a 35mm camera. I could have gotten by with that quite nicely for the time being. Sigh!
In my original post, I was more complaining about all the "I bought a X rated UG from KEH and it was perfect" posts I have seen over the years.
Although, I admit to stupidity in buying this lens, I did not even call to find out what may have been wrong with it. Although, in the past few years the sales people seem to have no more access to the stuff than than we the buyers have, they seem to read the same listing off their computers that we read off their website, not like back when King himself answered the phone. Actually, the shutter is probably worth what I paid for it, so I did not exactly get cheated. On the other hand, I did not get exactly what I expected which was a ratty beat up but working old lens.
I guess that I was so excited about finally having a real view camera to play with, I got carried away. That old Symmar would have given me a pretty good basic lens set to play with. The 135 Optar off my Crown Graphic, and the 210/370 convertible Symmar would be pretty much the same as a 35/50/90 lens set on a 35mm camera. I could have gotten by with that quite nicely for the time being. Sigh!
Have you tried it yet????
KEH has offered to take it back, refund or exchange for a more expensive lens. Unfortunately, they do not have another convertible in stock. What he is offering is something like twice the price. I have a bid in on something eBayish right now, I think I will wait until I find out about that before deciding (If I win that I will not have the funds to upgrade).
Nope, I have not tried it, I do not have a lensboard to fit it to the camera. However, as you can tell from the photo I posted it is pretty far gone, it would be about like using an 8 point star filter in effect, I think.
I would like to comment to those who posted web info about fungi. There are many kinds of fungus from tasty mushrooms to itchy athletes foot, to fairy rings of toadstools; millions if not billions of different types. Yes, there are spores in the air around us, but hopefully not the ones that attack camera lenses. Fungi reproduce by exploding and they can contaminate things many feet from where they start out.
The usual way of dealing with fungi on lenses is to clean them with a mixture of hydrogen peroxide (hair bleach strength, not the disinfectant strength stuff) and ammonia. The HO5 kills the fungi, and the ammonia removes the dead fungi. If the infection is as advanced as it is on this lens, it probably has etched the glass. The lens could still be repaired, but it would cost many hundreds of dollars as the lens would have to be reground, recoated, and recemented. Maybe worthwhile for a rare museum piece, but not for a user.
Another point, one of the posters got it backwards, the spores are almost indestructible, the fungi can be destroyed. Fungi like it warm, damp, and dim, they do not deal well with oxygen, nor ultraviolet, which is why moving air and bright sunlight will pretty much keep them in check. I also have some medicine in the house that will wipe out a ringworm infection (another fungus) in about 3 days, although the recommend using it for another 7 days to kill any spores that continue to bloom.
The point, in case someone missed it, is that minor fungus on a lens can be dealt with if it can be got at, as far gone as this one is, the lens is pretty much junk.
Nope, I have not tried it, I do not have a lensboard to fit it to the camera. However, as you can tell from the photo I posted it is pretty far gone, it would be about like using an 8 point star filter in effect, I think.
I would like to comment to those who posted web info about fungi. There are many kinds of fungus from tasty mushrooms to itchy athletes foot, to fairy rings of toadstools; millions if not billions of different types. Yes, there are spores in the air around us, but hopefully not the ones that attack camera lenses. Fungi reproduce by exploding and they can contaminate things many feet from where they start out.
The usual way of dealing with fungi on lenses is to clean them with a mixture of hydrogen peroxide (hair bleach strength, not the disinfectant strength stuff) and ammonia. The HO5 kills the fungi, and the ammonia removes the dead fungi. If the infection is as advanced as it is on this lens, it probably has etched the glass. The lens could still be repaired, but it would cost many hundreds of dollars as the lens would have to be reground, recoated, and recemented. Maybe worthwhile for a rare museum piece, but not for a user.
Another point, one of the posters got it backwards, the spores are almost indestructible, the fungi can be destroyed. Fungi like it warm, damp, and dim, they do not deal well with oxygen, nor ultraviolet, which is why moving air and bright sunlight will pretty much keep them in check. I also have some medicine in the house that will wipe out a ringworm infection (another fungus) in about 3 days, although the recommend using it for another 7 days to kill any spores that continue to bloom.
The point, in case someone missed it, is that minor fungus on a lens can be dealt with if it can be got at, as far gone as this one is, the lens is pretty much junk.
It isn't fungus, it's separation.
Any time you click on the grade in a listing it will display that.
I take all of those postings with a big grain of salt. I take the "I bought a X rated BGN from KEH and it was perfect" with a slighly smaller grain of salt.
Dang... now you are giving away my "secret" source.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2011
- Messages
- 55
- Format
- 4x5 Format
For several years I've been using a 210mm Schneider Componon as if it were a convertible Symmar on myGraflex RB Auto SLR. I've been pleased with the quality of the resulting prints (even up to 20x24 inches). If I had your problem I would get a 210 Componon (if I could find one cheap on Ebay) and replace the rear element of the Symmar with the rear element of the Componon.
Graywolf, time to go McGyver on it. It is already a wreck. So get some cardboard, some duct tape, some slow film, and a lens cap. Use the cardboard and duct tape to make a temporary lens board. Lock the shutter open with the focusing switch. Load some of that slow film and make a test shot at a slow enough shutter speed that you can use the lens cap as the shutter, like a half second.
Develop the film and evaluate. If the image doesn't suck, get a real lens board and a CLA. (and clean up the duct tape goo...). You've got yourself a lens.
If it does suck, consider Lomography.
And get tape residue all over the camera I just spent 3 months getting into working condition?
And why not just use the shutter, it may be slow but not so much that you would not get a usable negative. Or why not shoot with the studio strobe? Hopefully, the x-sync works. Do I have to use duct tape and cardboard? Can I use foam core and photographic tape, which I do not have to go out and buy?
Joking aside, why did I not think of taping a makeshift board to the camera. I did think of using a makeshift board, but gave up the idea because it would not fit in the groove on the camera. Silly, huh?
McGyver would use Scotch Magic Tape of course, since it leaves no residue. But duct tape (or even better, electrical tape) is the true geek way.
Hot glue, dammit... HOT GLUE!!
A couple of big-ass rubber bands would work just fine.
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
- Messages
- 56
- Format
- Multi Format
I browsed this thread from start to end, and i am afraid i have to disagree with most opinions (should i call them fears?) expressed so far.
1) I don't think that the "star", which is not a rare find in convertile Symmars, is actually caused by a fungus.
I bet it's some kind of separation, possibly caused by impact, thermal shock, or other cause.
Fungal infections are VERY RARE inside a cemented group, and almost impossible to find in lenses cemented with modern glues. Canada balsam is a whole different story, it can crystallize, and separates starting from the edge of the lens, giving way to a possible infection.
I had a 210mm conv Symmar, with the SAME problem, only smaller. The "star" was in the same place, at the center of the back lens, inside the external cemented doublet. There is no fungus which hits two lenses in the same place.
Re-cementing one of the two doublets of a plasmat lens is actually doable, even for a first-timer, but separating the elements can be quite difficult. I guess that the Symmar was assembled with a UV-curing cement, so i don't think that a solvent would be of much use. Boiling the lens for some time could do the trick, as with Apo-Skopars, but i can't confirm.
If you succeed, buy a specialized Norland cement, and follow the instructions available with a simple Google search.
You'll find a few posts with a lot of good advices.
BTW, my Symmar had a lesser fault, but the result was on par with others which had perfectly clean glasses.
If you don't feel to embark in optical surgery, at least try the cheap route with your shutter. You spent very little for the lens, why don't try if you can get away with the "lazyness" of your shutter spending almost nothing?
Soak it in Zippo fuel and exercise the slow speeds while it's wet.
Clean the leaves with a paper towel before they dry up, cause some oil would migrate there and make them sticky.
Start with little naphta and retry with more if not enough. Dry with canned air or a mini-compressor.
2) There is too much fear of fungal infections: fungii are a rare occurrence, especially these days.
Most lens cleaning fluids are a poison for fungii which are already on the glass, and a clean lens won't be attacked anyway, even if cleaned with distilled water.
If you routinely clean a lens before storing it for long time, and avoid placing it in a hot and damp environment, there is very little to be afraid of.
BTW, uncoated lenses can be cleaned with good success, and most of the times there are no traces left.
The coated glesses are more prone to persistent damage, cause the coating can be very thin, so that the acid produced by a fungal infection can easily etch a visible trace.
Use vinegar with dismantled elements, and try ROR (residual oil remover) for light infections, and with the element still in its place.
have fun
Paolo
Sent from my Android tablet
1) I don't think that the "star", which is not a rare find in convertile Symmars, is actually caused by a fungus.
I bet it's some kind of separation, possibly caused by impact, thermal shock, or other cause.
Fungal infections are VERY RARE inside a cemented group, and almost impossible to find in lenses cemented with modern glues. Canada balsam is a whole different story, it can crystallize, and separates starting from the edge of the lens, giving way to a possible infection.
I had a 210mm conv Symmar, with the SAME problem, only smaller. The "star" was in the same place, at the center of the back lens, inside the external cemented doublet. There is no fungus which hits two lenses in the same place.
Re-cementing one of the two doublets of a plasmat lens is actually doable, even for a first-timer, but separating the elements can be quite difficult. I guess that the Symmar was assembled with a UV-curing cement, so i don't think that a solvent would be of much use. Boiling the lens for some time could do the trick, as with Apo-Skopars, but i can't confirm.
If you succeed, buy a specialized Norland cement, and follow the instructions available with a simple Google search.
You'll find a few posts with a lot of good advices.
BTW, my Symmar had a lesser fault, but the result was on par with others which had perfectly clean glasses.
If you don't feel to embark in optical surgery, at least try the cheap route with your shutter. You spent very little for the lens, why don't try if you can get away with the "lazyness" of your shutter spending almost nothing?
Soak it in Zippo fuel and exercise the slow speeds while it's wet.
Clean the leaves with a paper towel before they dry up, cause some oil would migrate there and make them sticky.
Start with little naphta and retry with more if not enough. Dry with canned air or a mini-compressor.
2) There is too much fear of fungal infections: fungii are a rare occurrence, especially these days.
Most lens cleaning fluids are a poison for fungii which are already on the glass, and a clean lens won't be attacked anyway, even if cleaned with distilled water.
If you routinely clean a lens before storing it for long time, and avoid placing it in a hot and damp environment, there is very little to be afraid of.
BTW, uncoated lenses can be cleaned with good success, and most of the times there are no traces left.
The coated glesses are more prone to persistent damage, cause the coating can be very thin, so that the acid produced by a fungal infection can easily etch a visible trace.
Use vinegar with dismantled elements, and try ROR (residual oil remover) for light infections, and with the element still in its place.
have fun
Paolo
Sent from my Android tablet
Last edited by a moderator:
First, I believe the original Symmars had Canadian Balsam in them. They after all date from the 1950's.
Second, that is not the only patch in the lens, there is a second smaller one in the rear element, and one just starting in the front element. Also, I have seen lenses far farther along than this one, To the point where the whole lens is covered with the stuff. It can grow incredibly fast unter the right conditions. And some fungi can absorbe almost anything organic, including microscopic organisms floating in the air.
Third, separation usually starts at the edge of the lens, not the middle. And it does not have that ordered fractal appearance. And fungal infections of lenses are not uncommon, all you have to do is leave your lenses in a dim damp place for a year or so.
Nope, I am 100% certain this is fungus. It may not actually be between the cemented pair however, I would have to take the thing apart to be sure.
However, I have decided to keep the shutter. My rational is that if I subtract he $25 or so I would be out for shipping from what I paid, I get a pretty good price for a Synchro-Compur #1. I will see if I can not mount my enlarging lens to the front of it, so I can use them as close up lenses.
Second, that is not the only patch in the lens, there is a second smaller one in the rear element, and one just starting in the front element. Also, I have seen lenses far farther along than this one, To the point where the whole lens is covered with the stuff. It can grow incredibly fast unter the right conditions. And some fungi can absorbe almost anything organic, including microscopic organisms floating in the air.
Third, separation usually starts at the edge of the lens, not the middle. And it does not have that ordered fractal appearance. And fungal infections of lenses are not uncommon, all you have to do is leave your lenses in a dim damp place for a year or so.
Nope, I am 100% certain this is fungus. It may not actually be between the cemented pair however, I would have to take the thing apart to be sure.
However, I have decided to keep the shutter. My rational is that if I subtract he $25 or so I would be out for shipping from what I paid, I get a pretty good price for a Synchro-Compur #1. I will see if I can not mount my enlarging lens to the front of it, so I can use them as close up lenses.
No - KEH will accept a return because it is their stated policy.
From the KEH web site"
Returns are allowed within 14 days of invoice date and are subject to the following conditions:
* NEW items must be in perfect, brand new condition and returned in manufacturer's original undamaged box. All manufacturer's original packing materials, accessories and original unused warranty cards(and rebate forms if applicable) must also be included and in perfect condition.
* USED items must be in same condition as originally shipped.
* Returned items must be shipped prepaid to KEH RETURNS.
* Returned items shipped COD or "shipping charges collect" will not be accepted.
* Returned items that do not meet the above conditions will be subject to a minimum 15% restocking fee.
* AS-IS items are not returnable.
I have not seen a snowflake pattern, but have seen a filamentous web-like appearance, and a fern-like appearance.
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
- Messages
- 56
- Format
- Multi Format
I am sorry, most makers used epoxydic or maybe even cyanacrylic cement during the fifties.
The only maker i know which used Canada balsam at the time was Boyer. Maybe other small makers too, not the big ones. During the fifties/early sixties Voigtlander and Rodenstock used "new" cements which proved to be somewhat prone to separation: that's why we see today many conv. Sironars and Apo-Skopars with funny-looking separation problems.
The separation you have in mind (yellowish, starting from the edge, with crystalization) are typical of "balsamed" lenses. Modern lenses have rainbow-like iridescence and other strange patterns. Quite different.
Fungii can be cobweb-like, reticulated, but i have never seen a fungus which resembles a frost crystal observed at the microscope.
Whatever it is, nothing beats checking first-person.
Removing the elements is not difficult. IIRC they are held in place by retaining rings, so dismantling the lens with a couple of simple tools is quite easy.
Ibelieve that you'll see that the problem is inside the cemented group... and if there is no separation at the edge, there would be no magical way for a fungus to get to the center of the lens.
I have some anedoctal evidence that supports my opinion:
my Symmar was purchased 20 years ago WITH the "star"; nothing changed during all this time, even after a "torture test" of nearly 15 years spent in a very humid cellar, of a deserted and unheated house.
The wooden cupboard that stored the lenses got badly damaged...
BTW, ALL my old LF lenses were subject to the same careless treatment (i know, i know, i am guilty!), and not a single one got any trace of fungus. Some were very old, others were post-WWII, and many had no caps or any other protection.
After 15 years, before packing all the studio stuff and bringing everything home, i decided to absorb the humidity inside the cupboard, using those white crystals. After i used some packages, and after i had collected more than 5 liters of water, i gave up and decided to pick up everything, and let them "stabilize" at home ;-)
The only affected equipments were some Compur or Copal leaf shutters, that got somewhat sticky. The Compounds were ALL perfectly fine. NO damage whatsoever to the glasses.
As you see, "one year" of humidity and exposure to a dirty environment didn't cause any major problem. Even 15 years were not enough! Humidity CAN cause a fungal growth, but it's not sure, and not even probable.
If you decide to keep the shutter, and you clean it successfully with the "naphta method", be aware that you don't need to make a flange for front-mounting an enlarger lens. Many Schneider Comparon/Componon/Componon-S have cells that directly fit a standard No1 shutter. Check the pdf's on Schneider web site and you'll get all the answers you need.
AFAIK it's still unsure if the elements of a Componon-S and of a single-coated Symmar-S are the same or not. Possibly the difference lies only in slightly different spacing...
I am just reporting the opinion of a very competent technician; the final answer would come only from a careful measure with a spherimeter.
have fun
CJ
Sent from my Android tablet
cyberjunkie... Oh, now you've done it. You mentioned naphtha to clean gunk from a shutter. Brace yourself for the the naphtha Nazis!!
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
- Messages
- 56
- Format
- Multi Format
I have JUST fixed a Compound No.3 shutter with non-working B and T functions, using only a kind of "rectified petroleum" (which is midway between Avio fuel and Zippo's), and some thin blotting paper. No need to "soak" anything though.
There are much better uses for naphta, than a quick 'n dirt flushing of unopened shutters, but my early experiments gave me encouraging results. If i have to give numbers, roughly 1/3 "problem solved", 1/3 "back to problem soon", 1/3 "no way!".
Of course there are caveats:
1) no flushing with paper leaves (safe with other non-metallic diaphragm leaves, like phenolic)
2) clean the shutter leaves with thin blotting paper (or whatever you have at hand) while still wet, to remove the traces of oil/grease that have migrated onto them during the "flushing".
If you feel confident, opening the shutter and cleaning only where is needed would be much better. The optimum would be removing the gear train and clean it separately. That's why i am waiting for a second-hand ultrasonic cleaner, which i will also use to clean polymerized lubricants inside clockwork retarder assemblies.
All the tools i use are very cheap. If i had to start again from scratch, i'd buy less whatchmaker screwdrivers, but of much better quality (and with well made handles!).
Doing your home work with Google, and a good dose of common sense, can help a lot in increasing the success rate.
Another consideration: while shutters dismantled to bits, and never reassembled, are VERY expensive to be fixed, a "flushed" one won't make you spend one cent more!
Last thing: don't take for granted the opinions of people who have more money than common sense. Personally i find more rewarding to fix things on my own, than having to pay a professional. Of course, nobody is "born experienced", so it takes some time and little patience to develop some skills and discover your own small tricks.
When i succeed in fixing something, which i deemed as beyond my skills, it's a great satisfaction. As always, YMMV.
have fun with your gummed-up shutters
CJ
Sent from my Android tablet
Last edited by a moderator:
That isn't fungus. Fungus isn't snowflake shaped and almost never starts at the center of the lens because it needs access to the air to metabolize and grow. Fungus starts at the edges of the lens. That's glue separation. Still a costly repair.
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
- Messages
- 56
- Format
- Multi Format
Amazing!
A post by somebody with first hand experience!
Too bad there are a few post like this, and too many with metropolitan legends
have fun
CJ
Sent from my Android tablet
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |