Q: Difference between Symmar vs Symmar-S lenses
hass...@my-deja.com
a Symmar lens and a Symmar-S? I'm buying a
Symmar 210mm/5.6 lens with compur shutter but I'm
concerned about how it compares with a Symmar-S.
Any comments? Anyone have a ballpark on what a
Symmar 210mm/5.6 should cost?
Thanks for any help.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
JayAndriot
JCurcio
>Date: 1/11/01 9:03 PM Eastern Standard
>
>Symmar-S are multicoated.
But the Symmars are single coated or not coated at all?
Erik Asgeirsson
is single coated.
"JCurcio" <jcu...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010111222813...@ng-bh1.aol.com...
Sandy King
Both are lenses of the plasmat design. The older of the two is the Symmar,
which was replaced in the early 1970s by the Symmar-S. The older Symmar was
a convertible lens, designed so that the individual cell on the rear could
be used by itself at about 1.5X the focal length of the combined cells.
There were two aperture scales, one in white for the combined cells, one in
green for the single cell on the rear. The design of the Symmar-S is
slightly different and the individual cells are not corrected to be used by
themselves. What Schneider figured out ws that very few people were
actually using the old Symmar as a convertible and they went for
optimization of the performance of the combined cells in the Symmar-S.
The Symmar-S provided a small improvement in performance over the Symmar-S,
and contemporary Schneider lenses of Symmar name are better yet. However,
in typical use the older Symmar is a very capable performer. It is clearly
not the equivalent of its modern counterparts but it would be very
difficult to tell the difference on the print in many cases. There are so
many other factors that go into final print quality that small, and at
times even significant, differences in optical performance are less
important than one might at first be led to believe/
The older Symmar was single coated, the Symmar-S multi-coated during most
of the years of its manufacture.
As for value, these lenses come up a lot on ebay. For an idea of going
price you should look there in the completed items section.
Sandy King
Look at ebay for the gong price
Georges Pelpel
My convertible Symmar (210/370) is coated and very sharp. From what I
read the double-coating of the Symmar-S helps reduce glare in difficult
situations. The Symmar-S has also the reputation of being super sharp.
Georges Pelpel
Jess4203
>which was replaced in the early 1970s by the Symmar-S. The older Symmar was
>a convertible lens, designed so that the individual cell on the rear could
>be used by itself at about 1.5X the focal length of the combined cells.
>There were two aperture scales, one in white for the combined cells, one in
>green for the single cell on the rear. The design of the Symmar-S is
>slightly different and the individual cells are not corrected to be used by
>themselves. What Schneider figured out ws that very few people were
>actually using the old Symmar as a convertible and they went for
>optimization of the performance of the combined cells in the Symmar-S.
>
>The Symmar-S provided a small improvement in performance over the Symmar-S,
>and contemporary Schneider lenses of Symmar name are better yet. However,
>in typical use the older Symmar is a very capable performer. It is clearly
>not the equivalent of its modern counterparts but it would be very
>difficult to tell the difference on the print in many cases. There are so
>many other factors that go into final print quality that small, and at
>times even significant, differences in optical performance are less
>important than one might at first be led to believe/
>
>The older Symmar was single coated, the Symmar-S multi-coated during most
>of the years of its manufacture.
>
>As for value, these lenses come up a lot on ebay. For an idea of going
>price you should look there in the completed items section.
>
>Sandy King
>
>
>
>Look at ebay for the gong price
>
>
" Well said, that was laid on with a trowel!"
Roy
Ted Harris
already presented:
1) If you go to the Schneider website you will see the design differences.
2) Checking the serial number of any lens in question against the tables at the
website will also tell you if the lens is multicoated (not to mention that, to
my knowledge, all multicoated Schneider lenses are so marked on the rim) as
should looking for the two distinctly different colored reflections in the
glass. I'm not sure that it is safe to say that "most Symmar-S lenses were
multicoated." Tomy recollection Schneider started multicoating around 1978
with the 210 Symmar and within two years all offerings were multicoated.
Again, the definitive info is on the web site.
3) Within the univers of lenses called "Symmar" the lenses in question are one
to one and a half generations back from the current lens ... the Symmar-S MC
and the Symmar S respectively; and two generations back ... the Symmar. The
current offering, the APO Symmar is a tru apochromat which is a significant
setp forward in producing images.
Cheers,
Ted
Ted Harris
Resource Strategy
Henniker, New Hampshire
Lars Michael
> Can anyone please tell me the difference between
> a Symmar lens and a Symmar-S? I'm buying a
> Symmar 210mm/5.6 lens with compur shutter but I'm
> concerned about how it compares with a Symmar-S.
> Any comments? Anyone have a ballpark on what a
> Symmar 210mm/5.6 should cost?
> Thanks for any help.
At www.keh.com, the Symmar-S 210 sells anywhere from $645
to $325. The APO Symmar sells new for $825 at Badger.
I got my Symmar-S 210 at a local National Camera Exchange
for under $300.
Lars
mic...@schneideroptics.com
Symmar lenses were single coated, but so were Symmar-S lenses until the
late '70s. Taken directly from our large format FAQ:
"The first Symmar-S lens to be multi-coated was the Symmar-S 150mm,
serial number 13,014,862 in March 1977. The 210mm followed and then the
rest of the focal lengths were completed by early 1978."
The multi-coated symmar-S lenses are marked as such on the lens.
Michael Klayman
Technical Specialist
Schneider Optics, Inc.
Scott Bacon
$400. This has been a very common lens on eBay in recent weeks. You may be
able to get it for less now.
-Scott Bacon
http://www.naturalorderphoto.com
<hass...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:93lluf$7oa$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Richard Knoppow
The original f/5.6 Symmar (there is an even older f/6.8 Symmar which
is a Dagor clone) was intended to be convertible by removing the front
cell and using the rear cell alone. There is a second set of f/stops
for this.
The Symmar-S is a later version intended to be used as a combined
lens. Probably the corrections as a combined lens are better since no
compromise would have been needed to get good performance from the
rear cell used alone.
Both are good lenses but the later one is a better lens.
I have no idea any more of what lenses go for. There is often a
distinct difference between eBay prices and those at local sales.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dick...@ix.netcom.com
ArtKramr
>From: dick...@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
>Date: 1/12/01 5:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <3a5fa85a...@news.mindspring.com>
Many years ago Herr Schneider (the younger) came to the US. We had lunch. He
was proud that the Symmar was a convertable.I told him that the single elements
were not very good and that no one I knew ever converted the lens. He was
shocked and said that if the lens was not convertable he could redesign it and
the result would be a better lens. I told him that In my opinion he should do
just that. Shortly after the Symmar S was born.
Arthur Kramer
Las Vegas NV
Patrick Bartek
Most all lenses made after World War II are, at least, single coated.
Most lenses made since about the mid-70s are multicoated.
--
Patrick Bartek
NoLife Polymath Group
bar...@pdai.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
David Grandy
Symmar's were multicoated, and that was introduced with the S - although
even then not all S's were multicoated. Multicoating was indicated by
"MC" as in "Schneider 210 mm f5.6 MC". The "S" line has now been
succeeded by the APO-Symmar's.
If you have a Symmar 210, I would guess that it's the same as mine,
which is a convertible 210/370 mm lens. Have a look at the aperture
ring and see if there are two different f-stop indexes, and that should
let you know. This is not a good lens at 370.
Having said that, at 210 mm my Symmar is a very nice lens. I try to
protect the front element from situations where flare could be a problem
- since it WILL flare if given a chance. Could a lens testing device
tell the difference between the Symmar, the S & the APO? Possibly.
Could I? I doubt it.
As for price, have a look in Shutterbug. This will give you the current
market value.
I'm not aware of a 210 f5.6 Symmar that wasn't the convertible, but
perhaps others could comment on that.