Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Vivitar Series 1 24-70 or 24-48?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:41 pm    Post subject: Vivitar Series 1 24-70 or 24-48? Reply with quote

Vivitar made two manual-focus S1 24-something zooms that I know of, the first model being the 24-48mm constant f/3.8 aperture, and the second being the 24-70mm f/3.8-4.8.

I'm interested in finding a good 24-something zoom in Canon FD mount. The Tokina AT-X 24-70 f/2.8 seems like a great lens, but is quite expensive. I've had excellent results with other Vivitar S1 lenses -- especially the 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5 -- so I don't have a problem with trying a Vivitar S1. But obviously, I would prefer to get the one that is the sharpest.

I'm curious if anyone here has had occasion to try out both the 24-48 and the 24-70? And if so, which did you prefer?

Thanks!


PostPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can't help with those 2 but I have the 35-85 F2.8 which is a chunky beast but delivers the goods. Better at the long end though.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've read quite a number of reports extolling the virtues of the S1 35-85, and have seen some very nice photos as well. But I have a Canon FD 35-105 f/3.5 lens, which is one of Canon's best FD zooms, so I don't really have use for that focal range. Hence, my questions regarding the Vivitar zooms that start at 24mm.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the 24-48 Series One but not the 24-70 (which I believe is a Cosina made lens?). My 24-48 is very sharp, but currently is in need of a repair...The 24-48 is in my opinion a better lens as the 24-70 is much to slow on the long end


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You want the superb Series 1 24-48 model (Kiron made). The Series 1 24-70 is Cosina made (not necessarily a bad thing). The S-1 24-70 is no slouch. But the 24-48 is better and better made.



Russ


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 2:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, guys. I'm putting the 24-48 on my Christmas list, and will start dropping hints. Cool Problem is, though, I might just have to grab one when I see it come along if it's in Canon FD. So far, those I've seen have been in Nikon and Oly mounts.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
Thanks, guys. I'm putting the 24-48 on my Christmas list, and will start dropping hints. Cool Problem is, though, I might just have to grab one when I see it come along if it's in Canon FD. So far, those I've seen have been in Nikon and Oly mounts.


They don't come around all that often. When one does, GRAB IT!



Kiron Kid-MrVivSeries1


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Heh. Got an extra one you might want to part with? Looks like you might have one or two to spare there.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
Thanks, guys. I'm putting the 24-48 on my Christmas list, and will start dropping hints. Cool Problem is, though, I might just have to grab one when I see it come along if it's in Canon FD. So far, those I've seen have been in Nikon and Oly mounts.


Why do you forget the Sigma 21/35 which has better angle and quality ok ?(there are 2 versions of it : 1st is 2 touch/2nd is one touch)

+ check if the sigma 18/35 exists in fd mount (it exists in many manual mounts)


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've the the Sigma 21-35 in AF Nikon mount & the AF version 's MTF ratings are better than the MF model.IMHO, the Series One 24-48 is slightly better than the Sigma in IQ & has much better build quality.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just to complete the list there is the Canon FD 20-35 f3.5L, tough it might be quite expensive.

Cheers, Marty.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the additional feedback. I wasn't aware of the Sigma, so I'll check it out too.

Hey Marty, yeah I'm aware of the FD 20-35L. Canon also built an FD 24-35L, which predates the 20-35L. Heh, I'd love to own either, but as you mention, they tend to be rather pricey.

Right now, I have my eyes on an outfit -- an AE-1 with the Vivitar S1 24-48 attached that I might be able to pick up for a good price. Since I already own an AE-1 (and seldom shoot with it), if I get this outfit, I'll sell the AE-1 for whatever I can get for it, which will discount the price of the lens even further.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello there,
I have a Vivitar S1 24-48 in FD mount, which now that I am using Nikon DSLRs most of the time, I don't really use.

PM me if you are interested and Ill try to get some pictures of/with the lens.

Regards

Angus


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Screamin Scott wrote:
I've the the Sigma 21-35 in AF Nikon mount & the AF version 's MTF ratings are better than the MF model.IMHO, the Series One 24-48 is slightly better than the Sigma in IQ & has much better build quality.


Also, the Tamron SP 20-40AF is a very good lens.

Russ


PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem with the Sigma and Tamron AF lenses is that I won't be able to find them in Canon FD mount. So . . .

Well, anyway, I bid on an auction on eBay and won an AE-1 with the Vivitar 24-48 mounted to it:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=370272694173

Here's hoping the lens will "look fine to me" also. Seems like sometimes the best way to get a good deal on an item is to buy a kit in which it's included. So, anyway, I'll be hoping for the best until it arrives. Sure can't tell much from the pictures.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Definitely a bargain at 46$ , Michael.
Cheers, Marty.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marty wrote:
Definitely a bargain at 46$ , Michael.
Cheers, Marty.


Fantastic deal! Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Vivitar S1 24-48 arrived today. It came with a Canon AE-1, which even has a functioning battery.

The lens is in reasonably good shape. Some cosmetic wear on the two rings, but no dings or dents. The glass is perfect. As I was checking it out, though, I noticed that the aperture blades were stuck open. Drat.

So, I opened up the back of the lens, and cleaned the blades. Just got it back together a few minutes ago, so I'm finally getting to check it out.

Really it's hard to tell much just looking through the viewfinder. And since this lens is Canon FD mount and being used with Canon FD cameras, it will have to wait at least until tomorrow before I'll have any test results.

I'm hoping for at least reasonable performance between 24mm and 35mm. If it doesn't deliver, I'll be looking for something else.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael

If it's in proper optical condition, you'll be quite pleased with its performance.

Kiron Kid


PostPosted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, it appears to be. As I mentioned, the glass is flawless. And when I had it apart, I had a chance to view the lens interior -- that is, between the two main element groups. No haze or fungus, at any rate.

I plan to load the camera up with a roll of film tomorrow and give the old Vivitar a workout.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, well, I got to run a roll of film through my Canon F-1, testing out this Vivitar S1 24-48mm f/3.8.

I tested the lens at two focal lengths and three aperture settings: 24mm and 48mm at f/3.8, f/8, and f/16. I'm displaying the photo taken at 24mm and f/8 only, however. Photos taken at f/3.8 were noticeably softer than at f/8, and the ones I took at f/16 were also softer, but not quite as soft as the ones taken at f/3.8. And I'm showing the 24mm focal length photo simply because that's the one focal length I am most interested in.

I scanned the images with my Epson 4990 at 4800 ppi. I should mention that even though the Epson claims 4800 ppi resolution, it's closer to about 2000 ppi, which is typical for most flatbed scanners that claim much higher resolutions.

At first, I was disappointed with what I was seeing. The images looked reasonably sharp at smaller sizes, but as soon as I started zooming in on the scans, the detail just didn't seem to hold together very well. So, I loaded up some scans of photos I had taken recently with my Nikkor 24mm f/2.8, and compared them. As it turns out, the Vivitar's resolution seems to be roughly on par with the Nikkor's. The Nikkor exhibited noticeable red fringing in some of its photos, however, whereas the Vivitar didn't, but it did show a fair amount of flare.

For a test subject, I chose a "fort" I built in our backyard for my daughter nine years ago. She and her friends had a lot of fun playing there, and jumping from the fort onto a trampoline we used to own. But she's 18 years old now, and the fort doesn't get used for much of anything anymore except for lens tests.

Vivitar 24-48mm @ 24mm f/8:



I decided to compare it to a caboose I photographed with my Nikkor 24mm. I didn't record the aperture setting, but f/8 was probably close:



Here's a 100% crop of the Vivitar 24-48's image:



And a 100% crop of the Nikkor's image. I selected a location on the caboose that was close to the same distance as the subject in the Vivitar's photo.



Looking at the bolt that fastens the handrail to the side of the caboose and comparing it to the bolt visible in the lower left hand area of the Vivitar's image, it appears to me that they are approximately equal in definition. The 100% crop of the Vivitar image does show evidence of the flare I mentioned. This particular caboose image does not show any of the red fringing I mentioned above.

One other thing I noticed about the Vivitar is it seems to have very good contrast. This actually makes the flare somewhat difficult to control in post processing -- typically I increase contrast to reduce flare -- because the photo can end up having too much contrast.

Overall, I am satisfied at this point with the performance of the Vivitar 24-48mm f/3.8. I want to take it out for more thorough testing, however, before I make a final decision as to whether I will keep it or not. Chances are, if I can pick up a good 24mm prime for a reasonable price that clearly outperforms it, I'll sell it.


Last edited by cooltouch on Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:58 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

congratulations Michael!
that it compares well against the 2.8/24 Nikkor tells me this is a very good lens!

I also have been looking into getting a 24-xx zoom, so far had been considering a Tamron Adaptall 24-48 f3.5-3.8, good to know that there also is a Vivitar series 1

Would anybody know how the Tamron compares to the Viv S1?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kuuan wrote:
congratulations Michael!
that it compares well against the 2.8/24 Nikkor tells me this is a very good lens!

I also have been looking into getting a 24-xx zoom, so far had been considering a Tamron Adaptall 24-48 f3.5-3.8, good to know that there also is a Vivitar series 1

Would anybody know how the Tamron compares to the Viv S1?



If you don't mind auto-focus, the Tamron SP 20-40 f/2.7-3.5 is a very good lens. I have two of them. One for B/W on a manual focus body, and the other on my F100 for auto-focus work. They're VERY good.

Russ


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey Russ,

20-40 sounds very attractive, especially for a full-frame camera. I could definitely use one of those, especially if it's as good as you say. I just went over to eBay and had a look. Hmm . . . that 20-40 looks a LOT like a 24-70 Aspherical Tamron I bought for EOS mount back in 1994. I would have to rate my 24-70 as only good at 24mm and barely acceptable at 70mm. I need to do another, more thorough test with that lens, but with that test I did, I was a bit surprised by its performance. Hopefully the 20-40 is much better.

Kuuan, I have no experience with the Tamron 24-48, but I would very much enjoy looking at some images taken with it. As I mentioned above, I still want to do some more testing with this Vivita 24-48 before it finds a permanent home in my collection. I'm not all that happy with the flair it exhibits, and I'd like to do a direct comparison between it and my Nikkor 24 -- same subject, that is. I'll post the results here once I obtain them.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="cooltouch"]Hey Russ,

20-40 sounds very attractive, especially for a full-frame camera. I could definitely use one of those, especially if it's as good as you say. I just went over to eBay and had a look. Hmm . . . that 20-40 looks a LOT like a 24-70 Aspherical Tamron I bought for EOS mount back in 1994. I would have to rate my 24-70 as only good at 24mm and barely acceptable at 70mm. I need to do another, more thorough test with that lens, but with that test I did, I was a bit surprised by its performance. Hopefully the 20-40 is much better.
quote]

Michael

The Tamron SP 20-40, beat out some primes in the same range. It's VERY good.

Russ