Vivitar Series 1 90-180 vs Tamron SP 70-210 3.5-4

philslizzy · Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4748 Location: Cheshire, England

My two penn'orth.

When I worked in the trade Tamrons were seen as superior to Vivitar, and almost as good as camera manufacturers lenses. They were pretty expensive then too. We were told that Vivitar contracted out to several manufacturers and the lenses could vay in quality. On the other hand Tamron made their own lenses to a higher standard.

In the 70's and 80's peoples conceptions of equipment were different than now.

I think modern zooms are far better than old zooms (with few exceptions) in my experience. The kit lenses on my Nikon and NEX are superb. As is my Sigma 80-300DG

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

konicamera · Expire: 2014-06-14

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

fwcetus · Joined: 12 Jun 2015 Posts: 303 Location: New England

WNG555 · Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA

To add with regards to current pricing... it's rare yes, but also cult hype, and reseller frenzy.
I saw one in a pawn shop, which they picked up from an old lady after her husband died. They insisted it was worth over $450, even though no one showed interest. Justification was ebay with $450+ buy it now. Even though there were samples on ebay for $200.
Go figure.

I wasn't there for it, it was a prime lens I was picking up.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

I've read on more than one occasion that the Vivitar S1 90-180 was a very expensive lens to produce, that Vivitar originally intended it for medical work where they could justify the high price, but that the market was soft or some such, and so they tried to make a go of it on the consumer market, but that they were losing money with each one they sold.

I also read the Modern Photography test report for the S1 90-180, which included listings of the resolution and contrast, and after reading the test report, honestly, I was wondering what all the excitement was about. I just found this chart on the web, which was taken directly from the June, 1978 edition of Modern Photography:

Its best resolution numbers weren't even 55 lppmm, which, even by the 1980s when I was paying a lot of attention to these MP tests, I would have regarded as soft. Okay, granted, these are macro resolutions, but even so, Tamron's 90mm f/2.5 macro clearly outperforms it -- and it can be had for about 1/5 the price typically.

Back when I was a camera dealer some 25 years ago, I owned the S1 90-180 in Nikon mount. Very briefly. I bought it from a walk-in for a good price, and I planned on keeping it because even back then I'd heard how phenomenal the lens was. But I wasn't able to hang onto it. No, some guy offered me way too much money for it, and being in the business and all, I couldn't say no, so I sold it before I even had a chance to try it out. Oh well. But I've tried out my Tamron 90/2.5 plenty and now I have a Micro Nikkor 200/4, so frankly, given the choice between the Vivitar and the two macros mentioned above, I have no use for such an overpriced optic that probably will underperform the macro lenses I already own.

Paul · Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Posts: 173 Location: Hamburg-Germany

even though being late I would add my experiences:
I had the Tamron 3.5-4/70-210
Ergonomics and mechanical quality were great!
Optical performance not as good as my manual Sigma 3.5-4.5/70-210.
(and far from the level of my Tamron 2.8/70-200 AF)

It was better than some other lenses I had.
Nevertheless it had to go in the bay....

I also had the Tamron 3.5/70-210 - even though not the same time.
Being superb on film slr it showed some weird results on dslr. Some blue fringing, different results depending on the distance of the subject in focus. Being big and heavy and only max. 1 f-stop faster than the Sigma mentioned above (which was relevant in the old film days but not that much with dslr that perform quite well even at ISO 1600) it also had to go.

BTW:
I love the Tamron SP lenses!
Tamron really made some jewels of lenses and I still have quite a lot of them.
Still searching for a good copy of the 2.8/35-105 (or 28-105) with adaptall-mount.....
My favourits are the 90mm macro lenses and the SP 5.6/300 (which give my superb results - although some members here are not happy with their copies....

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

Well, regardless of Michael's comments above (which I'm not disputing btw), I love my copy of this lens. BUT, it is a solid heavy beast which needs tripod support and a lens hood to obtain the best out of it. I haven't owned mine very long but here is the first shot I've taken with it.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

Wow, Edgar. Well, there's no disputing the sharpness of your 90-180. I can even see the individual grains of pollen. And yours even has a reasonably decent depth of field at that magnification. Maybe Modern Photo's copy wasn't as good as yours?