Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

The other Solid Cat - Vivitar Series 1 800mm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:48 am    Post subject: The other Solid Cat - Vivitar Series 1 800mm Reply with quote
I had resisted buying the Vivitar Solid Cats Just because I didn't expect them to be very good. I'm actually pleasantly surprised.

Sony A7 II and Vivitar Series 1 Solid Cat 11/800


#1


#2


#3


#4


PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2022 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1 Congrats Wow! Those are exquisite!


PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2022 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Really not too bad. I managed to get a copy one or two years ago, but due to poor packaging, the front cap was smashed, very unfortunately.
It was said 600mm is better than 800mm or the other way around. I don't own.
The 450mm, I've seen two coming out in the past 4 years, topping over $900. One of them I remember had a BIN of $750, but somehow, I decided to bid.
Then final bidding price is over $900.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2022 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Remarkable.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2022 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congrats Like Dog


PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2022 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There's nothing wrong with that! It's sharp and the colours are excellent, the whites in particular. Like 1


PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
+1


PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks to all for your comments.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
How hard is it to use? I would think a solid cat would be heavy. Couple that with razor thin DOF and seems suitable only for tripod. Even with IBIS.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jamaeolus wrote:
How hard is it to use? I would think a solid cat would be heavy. Couple that with razor thin DOF and seems suitable only for tripod. Even with IBIS.


All true. I would not recommend using a DSLR optical viewfinder. The mirrorless with magnification I find to be critically important for all mirror lenses. Full frame helps further by not decreasing the field of view and associated stability issues. I am able to use most of my mirrors handheld and have used this one that way, but the results were too inconsistent, so I concluded that at least a monopod is needed and that is what I use most. Even at f/11 the depth of field is shallow, as you indicated. Mirrors take practice and getting used to but aren't too difficult with the right technique and camera aids. I shoot raw now but some of those results I've posted were jpeg. With the Sony, even if shooting raw, if you set the jpeg to a plus value in sharpness, the viewfinder will show sharper images, making focusing easier. With a good mirror, the focus will pop but lesser mirrors will be harder to discern near vs perfect focus. This solid cat comes into focus pretty convincingly, especially when compared to other long mirrors. And yes, it is relatively heavy but surprisingly small, so I don't find it too cumbersome.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2022 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ah, thanks. I've been watching the Rokkor 800 and have come close to pulling the trigger a couple of times but money for frivolous stuff has been a bit too tight to feel comfortable. A couple more months to retirement which will give me more time to sell a bunch of lenses on ebay for this kind of fun.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2022 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice pictures!

Agree mine pops contrast relatively nicely, but I don't have experience with many other mirror lenses.

The resolution on my Metabones speedbooster ultra is good, you can still tell it's a mirror lens but honestly it's really good.

My copy is in mint condition and I don't see any nasties inside.

Fun fact- the 600 and 800 identical in dimensions, it's just the last two elements mainly tweaked (according to patent data). In magazine tests the 600 was shown to have a bit better resolution than the 800.

And yes, mine is heavy enough, but the fact it fits into my smaller camera cases is the real pro.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2022 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
And a word of warning- the tripod collar on mine came pre-broken.

We figured out that it had the capacity to be over -tightened, and that's how mine was left. With not a mark on the tripod collar I wonder if it snapped.

It's also a bit too thin for the lens weight, although it fits perfectly snugly and is metal.

I could get it out and provide photos + more accurate description if you want.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2022 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:
And a word of warning- the tripod collar on mine came pre-broken.

We figured out that it had the capacity to be over -tightened, and that's how mine was left. With not a mark on the tripod collar I wonder if it snapped.

It's also a bit too thin for the lens weight, although it fits perfectly snugly and is metal.

I could get it out and provide photos + more accurate description if you want.


Thanks. I haven't had any issues with the tripod collar but will keep that in mind. I tend to make them tight enough to not move, but I don't overtighten, or at least don't think I do.

While I can't help comparing all my mirrors to each other, I try not to judge the longer ones against the shorter. With all things equal, I expect the shorter focal lengths to be sharper than the longer. I think this 800 solid cat is plenty good for its focal length. I get better results from it than from my Questar 700. However, I have 500mm mirrors that outperform this 800mm but I'm not so sure I can crop the 500mm image to equal the 800mm angle of view and still be better.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
eggplant wrote:
And a word of warning- the tripod collar on mine came pre-broken.

We figured out that it had the capacity to be over -tightened, and that's how mine was left. With not a mark on the tripod collar I wonder if it snapped.

It's also a bit too thin for the lens weight, although it fits perfectly snugly and is metal.

I could get it out and provide photos + more accurate description if you want.


Thanks. I haven't had any issues with the tripod collar but will keep that in mind. I tend to make them tight enough to not move, but I don't overtighten, or at least don't think I do.

While I can't help comparing all my mirrors to each other, I try not to judge the longer ones against the shorter. With all things equal, I expect the shorter focal lengths to be sharper than the longer. I think this 800 solid cat is plenty good for its focal length. I get better results from it than from my Questar 700. However, I have 500mm mirrors that outperform this 800mm but I'm not so sure I can crop the 500mm image to equal the 800mm angle of view and still be better.



Maybe it doesn't bother other people but one of the advantages of the solid cats for me is the very short hood length compared to other mirror lenses, on top of already being shorter than them.

I'm not spying on people with these lenses (in fact, not taking photos of anyone at all), but being conscious of the size of the gear I have does impinge my ability to relax into composition.

Even when the hoods can be reversed over the lens for storage, having a length-doubling hood as a requirement does suck the fun out a bit.

But given the lenses I'm talking about and how everyone else has to put up with it, or far bigger refracting lenses, I should probably get over it :p

I should conduct a proper flare test though. The 600mm to be compared to the non solid Sigma would be a good choice.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:


Maybe it doesn't bother other people but one of the advantages of the solid cats for me is the very short hood length compared to other mirror lenses, on top of already being shorter than them.

I'm not spying on people with these lenses (in fact, not taking photos of anyone at all), but being conscious of the size of the gear I have does impinge my ability to relax into composition.

Even when the hoods can be reversed over the lens for storage, having a length-doubling hood as a requirement does suck the fun out a bit.

But given the lenses I'm talking about and how everyone else has to put up with it, or far bigger refracting lenses, I should probably get over it :p

I should conduct a proper flare test though. The 600mm to be compared to the non solid Sigma would be a good choice.


I have experienced flare when expected but not in ordinary situations. Comparing anything to the Sigma with conclusive results is made difficult by the copy variance of the SIgma. Maybe, not flare, but definitely sharpness. I got lucky with the Sigma on only my second purchase, but it still isn't among my favored few.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:
...Maybe it doesn't bother other people but one of the advantages of the solid cats for me is the very short hood length compared to otmirror lenses, on top of already being shorter than them.

I'm not spying on people with these lenses (in fact, not taking photos of anyone at all), but being conscious of the size of the gear I have does impinge my ability to relax into composition.

Even when the hoods can be reversed over the lens for storage, having a length-doubling hood as a requirement does suck the fun out a bit.

But given the lenses I'm talking about and how everyone else has to put up with it, or far bigger refracting lenses, I should probably get over it :p

I should conduct a proper flare test though. The 600mm to be compared to the non solid Sigma would be a good choice.


Should be no difference in optimum hood length for lenses of equal focal length and front element diameter.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:
eggplant wrote:
...Maybe it doesn't bother other people but one of the advantages of the solid cats for me is the very short hood length compared to otmirror lenses, on top of already being shorter than them.

I'm not spying on people with these lenses (in fact, not taking photos of anyone at all), but being conscious of the size of the gear I have does impinge my ability to relax into composition.

Even when the hoods can be reversed over the lens for storage, having a length-doubling hood as a requirement does suck the fun out a bit.

But given the lenses I'm talking about and how everyone else has to put up with it, or far bigger refracting lenses, I should probably get over it :p

I should conduct a proper flare test though. The 600mm to be compared to the non solid Sigma would be a good choice.


Should be no difference in optimum hood length for lenses of equal focal length and front element diameter.


True. One thing I did not mention is that Vivitar claimed the solid cat design eliminated the bright center spot on most mirrors. I found that to be true.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
if i remember right the 600/8 cat always needed the supplied uv-filter. was said not that sharp. same for 450/4.5.
i have tests, one is showing superbe mirotar 500/4.5. i had the sigma 500/4 (15m version there is 7m too)with donot cap (f 5.6 built in). telling this since some years ago i saw two on ebay. one defective handle? but with donut cap. the other one without the cap. around 800 usd. magificient images made on parc same bird but shadow difficult light. lens was not made for that. and marvellous ducks. handholded.
noname 300/5.6 tested=crap. i remember vignetting on FF also saw on APS-C.
there is a huge german thread in a forum comparing mirrors also with astrolenses.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
i tested successfully 600/8 on contax AX in the evening shooting out of a shop. since catadioptic mirrors AF will also work beyond f 5.6 limit. dont have AX yet. would have got but sigma 500/4 with case was already sold- for money reasons.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
As woodrim says, the Sigma 600/8 is hit and miss. I've used several and still have 3 of them. Most are mediocre and will end up on sale before the good ones. These (good ones) in turn seem to be rare and won't be sold easily. So I'd say buy only if you can test them. And BTW, mine are all less than average... My Tamron is the winner.
As for hoods, I try to use the longest possible ones on any tele. Just stopping in length when some vignetting starts to show. Just my idea.

Last edited by Phalbert on Tue Nov 29, 2022 10:46 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
europanorama wrote:
if i remember right the 600/8 cat always needed the supplied uv-filter. was said not that sharp. same for 450/4.5.
i have tests, one is showing superbe mirotar 500/4.5. i had the sigma 500/4 (15m version there is 7m too)with donot cap (f 5.6 built in). telling this since some years ago i saw two on ebay. one defective handle? but with donut cap. the other one without the cap. around 800 usd. magificient images made on parc same bird but shadow difficult light. lens was not made for that. and marvellous ducks. handholded.
noname 300/5.6 tested=crap. i remember vignetting on FF also saw on APS-C.
there is a huge german thread in a forum comparing mirrors also with astrolenses.


I have no experience with the 4.5/500 Mirotar, nor will I ever. However, I have seen results from it that are very good. I've heard that before that the rear filters are critical and maybe they are for some mirrors, but many people report seeing no difference when not using them. My best mirror is the Nikon orange stripe. I didn't realize at first that I'm missing the filter. It doesn't seem to matter, although I do like having the filters because they're easier to remove and clean than are the rear elements.

Comparisons I've seen have meant very little to me because they test them all in the same way at the same distances. That might seem like it makes sense, but the mirrors behave differently with strengths and weaknesses at different distances. I've found very few to perform as well at a distance as they do at intermediate distances. I tend to believe they are optimized for medium distances and not for far away.

There is another factor that is not widely appreciated. I learned this from another MF'er (MFLenses person) Inexpensive adapters are less likely to be perfectly aligned than premium ones. It was after that discovery that I replaced a cheap adapter on my Mamiya mirror and immediately got better results. Mirrors are much more sensitive to any irregularities with adapters.

I rate my mirrors based on my experience using them and the consistency of the results. Some focus much more easily and are more forgiving when it comes to sensitive focus rings. The better ones have some dampening and don't turn quite so loosely. The sharper ones pop into focus, leaving little doubt while others require more back and forth of the focus in determining perfect focus - if you can even determine it. A test of lenses on tripods in a controlled environment will tell you how they perform in that way, not how well they'll perform in actual field use.

Copy variance is a big factor with most mirrors, but especially the off-brands. Tamron has pretty good consistency, as does the major brands like Minolta, Nikon, Zeiss, Oly, etc. I think the solid cats are consistent due to their unique construction. The numerous 5.6/300 lenses have inconsistencies but can be good lenses if you're fortunate enough to find a good one. I have gotten bum lenses but lucked out with two very good 300mm. I also have two bad Makinon 300. My Ohnar has given me very pleasing results and I used it a lot before getting the Tamron SP 350 and Minolta Vectis 400, which are both better.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 5:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
if you mention brands pls mention which lens. e.g. which sigma meant.
I have more data of both 500/4 and yashica telling when they went out of production. something early 80ties. price mentioned.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It is worth keeping in mind that light journeys between main mirror and secondary before heading for the rear correction optics, so any small misadjustment to the lightpath gets multiplied.

User attempts to remove dust may totally destroy any initial precision adjustment just like the usual knocks and bumps that equipment is usually exposed to, so less sturdy or those with signs of having been opened (e.g.minor scuffs on screws)should be avoided if not tested.

However, unsharp long telesnaps are not just caused by unstable camera support or bad focussing, but mey well come from unruly air movenments-

p.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 11:44 am    Post subject: Astrolenses for photographics Reply with quote
https://www.photoinfos.com/index-astronomie.htm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2