Vivitar Series 1 35-85mm f/2.8 -- a few test shots`

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

I recall seeing a thread recently on this topic, but I'll be dinged if I can find it. I've searched, too. So anyway, here we go again.

This lens, the Vivitar Series 1 35-85mm f/2.8 was introduced way back in 1975 and was something of an unusual optic, even by today's standards, given its rather fast f/2.8 constant aperture. This feature has always been what I've found attractive about this lens.

Vivitar Series 1 by Jussi, on Flickr

I've wanted to add one to my collection for years, and finally had the opportunity to pick up this copy for a very reasonable price over at the goodwill auction site. Here it is mounted to my Nikon F3:

This particular lens is often dinged because of its softness wide open, especially at 35mm. Well, after reading these critical reviews, I was quite interested to see how my lens performed. I just walked out into my currently overgrown backyard to snap a few photos. And I was encouraged by the results. Following are images shot wide open and at f/5.6 at 35mm and 85mm. The camera is a Sony NEX 7 set to ISO 100. The images below come straight from the camera -- translating from raw to jpg was the only processing done. To my eye, yes the images at f/2.8 are a bit soft, but not nearly as soft as others I've seen from this lens and with not anywhere close to the amount of ghosting and flare I've seen with other images. So I'm thinking I got a better than average copy. The point of focus for all four images was the red ball.

35mm f/2.8:

35mm f/5.6:

85mm f/2.8:

85mm f/5.6:

Okay, I know, you can't see a lot of detail in those shots. That's because I had to downsize for the forum, so here are 100% crops of the above four images:

35mm f/2.8:

35mm f/5.6:

85mm f/2.8:

85mm f/5.6:

My conclusions: In retrospect, I probably should have used a tripod instead of shooting offhand, especially since I'm evaluating sharpness. The images might have been a bit better. Nevertheless, my conclusions are that this lens may not have macro lens like sharpness, but I think it does a good job, considering what it is. With a minimal amount of processing, images from this lens will become perfectly acceptable for most purposes, especially web shots. So, I'm happy with this acquisition and I think it should work well for general photography. Its biggest drawback is its bulk and weight. It's a fat optic and not at all light, but then again it has a constant f/2.8 aperture, so its size is to be expected.

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

It's certainly an interesting lens and thanks for showing us your first efforts. Your post brought back a memory from when I worked in the photo retail trade back in the 70s . . .

The firm's owner was a 'hands-off' boss who still liked to play with the new products but unlike many proprietors he used to pay for whatever took away. One day he persuaded himself that the Series 1 35-85 would be ideal for his coming holiday jaunt so he shelled out the full retial price and went off with it to Venice or Vienna or wherever it was. A week later he brought his films in for processing, moaning a bit about the weight of the lens and the need to refocus. When he collected his artistic masterpiecs the next day he took one look at them and said (more or less) "Sheesh! I'd have done better buying postcards". The results were flat and muddy and no way could the processing lab get them to look any better. So he assumed the role of dis-satisfied customer and demanded a refund Very Happy

It may have been a bad copy and atypical of the type, but we sent it back to Vivitar for credit and -for once - he put his foot down and told us never to order another one.

It's one of the (many) lenses I've never actually used and I'd be really pleased to see some more pictures done with it - especially in good light.

PhantomLord · Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 472 Location: Szczecin, Poland

I always wondered what's the place of this lens when there's great Vivitar Series 1 28-90/2.8-3.5. It's lighter, wider and bit longer, quality-wise it's superb and holds 67mm filters. I know it has variable aperture, but seriously there's not such big gap between 2.8 and 3.5 on longer end. Also Vivitar Series 1 28-90 could be found cheaper than it's 35-85 brother.

bernhardas · Expire: 2017-05-23

edited

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

That's an interesting story, Stephen. It reminds me of a rule of mine, which is not to engage in any important activity with something new and untested.

Mateusz, I agree with your analysis completely. The S1 28-90 is one of my all-time favorite zooms. Back in my film days, I shot many rolls of film with that lens and was always satisfied with the results. But I haven't bought this S1 35-85 with any notion of replacing my 28-90, or even comparing the two. Mostly I just bought it because I wanted it. To me, it has historical importance, which is reason enough to own one. Plus, the fact that my example's performance is adequate makes it just the more useful.

Yeah, bernhardas, in full sunlight its performance might be ok. When I took the above pics, the sky was overcast. Strong sunlight might have helped some.

Big Dawg · Joined: 28 Jan 2009 Posts: 2530 Location: Thach Alabama

Nice shots. I bought mine for much the same reason as you. I wanted it. It was kinda funky and different and I wanted it so I bought it. Not my favorite lens when I had it and I finally parted with it...But I keep looking at them on Ebay and may wind up getting another....Crazy I know but this lens does that to me.

PBFACTS · Joined: 24 Dec 2008 Posts: 569

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

Yes, PBFacts, I can. Mine is in Nikon mount, so give me a while to test it out against my Nikkor AI 50mm f/1.4. I'll not bother shooting any images -- in fact, what I'll do is mount the two lenses to one of my Nikon bodies with a known accurate meter and see if the readout is the same at an indicated f/2.8.

To be honest, I'll be a bit surprised if it reads as slow as you describe. Vivitar was pretty good about accuracy back in those days, especially with their Series 1 line.