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

Cheap lens challenge!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:


Wow, great post with the Vivitar lens apart. I have what looks like a similar bodied Vivitar Series-1 that I will need to do the same for oily blades that are stuck and some inner haze. (28-90mm f/2.8-3.5 Varifocal)

As for dust, it's hard to keep the work area from contaminating the lens. A can of dust-off spray is a must.
To minimize on smears, I made sure one side of the element was spotless, put it into place and secured it, then clean off any smudges from my gloved fingers. Seems there will be some no matter how clean.

I rushed a bit and upon completion, discovered some dust got in, and missed an area. So, it will get another round.

I used typical lens cleaning solution and lens tissues from a camera store, they worked best for me. I tried the Zeiss wipe packs before on external lenses, and was very impressed.


Viv S1 28-90 with oily blades?? We need to collaborate on that one WNG! Mine's CFD mount. lets start a thread in the repair section.

My account and pic is already sufficient re the 28-200mm, and that's as far as I went. Just take out the 4 obvious screws holding the sleeve (which then slides off completely when the mount is off), it can now be pushed up revealing the mount securing screws. Remove and the mount pulls off as a unit, there's no other connections just a long aperture actuation lever.

Practice makes perfect re lens polishing perhaps.. I 'm happy with acetone it doesn't hurt coatings and is better at removing organic/condensate hazes (eg from helicoid oils). For fungus I usually use a wee drop, diluted, of household mould and mildew remover on a tissue or a corner of microfibre cloth. It's the detergent that does the trick.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 10:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
marcusBMG wrote:

Viv S1 28-90 with oily blades?? We need to collaborate on that one WNG! Mine's CFD mount. lets start a thread in the repair section.

My account and pic is already sufficient re the 28-200mm, and that's as far as I went. .


When it's time to pull apart my S-1 28-90, I'll take pics for the thread! Sounds like a plan!
I haven't checked out the repair section yet, I should. Presently, I have several old lenses queued for service.

I just completed a Vivitar 85-205 f/3.8 zoom that had fungus. A straight forward design that was pretty easy to disassemble. Unfortunately, the rear element got pitted with tiny dots. It doesn't show in photos, but the lens isn't a good performer despite the build quality (Kino Precision) and the f/3.8 spec. The reviews are at each extreme, from must buy, comparable to Zeiss zooms, to only good for scratching with steel wool and creating artsy distorted photos. Smile
Mine was a later one circa 1976 in minolta mount. Seems to have fewer elements from the original 13 in 9 groups. They are cheap as dirt, so one is enticed to buy one, like I did. It can be had for under $10, but save your money, it's not even worth that. It came in cheaper than my previous posting, at $4.

But it got beat further by today's arrival, a Vivitar (Tokina) 100-300mm f/5 Close-Focus tele zoom, w/ TX mount. $3.50!
It also has fungus, on the front and rear elements. The front element removes easily and was quickly cleaned. A look of the mid elements showed no problems. Trying to access the rear elements had me stumped. I attempted to remove the TX mount to gain space. I removed 3 screws on a sleeve barrel, but it only let the barrel slide into the lens! and the aperture ring let loose, dropping the balls. There were no screws securing the mount from the back. I took your advice to see if it might be secured from the barrel. A-ha! there were 3 screws under the aperture ring.
But removing them didn't release the TX flange. :-/

A bit more room was made and I unscrewed the rear element retainer ring. Only to discover the rear elements were housed as a unit, two groups in a tube assembly locktite-d together. So, I didn't have to cause the problems above to access the rear elements. But now I'm stuck and must continue to remove the mount in order to pull the sleeve out of the lens!

There is another problem, the thread locker is not letting me unscrew the little assembly.
Has anyone successfully remove/defeat the camera thread locker the manufacturers used?

UPDATE:
Acetone to the rescue! It dissolved the thread locker and I got access to the rear elements. Only one was bad....oddly. It wouldn't clean up, and concluded it was etch damage. I had cerium oxide available, so I decided to give polishing a try. It cleared the lens remarkably, and will hope the image quality didn't suffer. Cheap lens challenge continues!

UPDATE 2:
The test shots revealed a less than tack sharp result. Not certain if this was caused by the polishing or simply the lens' design. I tried another cheap sample of this lens in fixed Nikon mount. Initial shots looked better, but still soft. So I conclude it's the lens design.
It also has the same element etching problem, but to a lesser extent. So, something in their making initially at the factory had caused this.

Conclusion: I don't recommend anyone buying this lens if one is considering it. These two Vivitars have the Close Focus feature, and are Two-touch/internal focus design. Too bad.

My Vivitar (Komine) 135 f/2.8 remains the unseated King of cheap. What a great little lens!

Last edited by WNG555 on Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:09 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Though not off of ebay, but I got this thing from a local (typically overpriced) shop for exactly $5. Don't think I have the receipt anymore, but I doubt anyone paying more for this thing.

https://skvltd.wordpress.com/2014/01/14/5-x-5-a-bargain-experiment-cpc-mc-70-162mm-f3-5-auto-zoom-macro/


PostPosted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Few pics with the Kobori on my K5:
1. 200mm crop
2. 50mm
3. 100mm
Nothing to complain about for 99p with this lens!





PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2015 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I present to you the Ricoh P Macro Zoom, 28-100mm f4. I got it on evil bay for $3.75 plus postage. It is in fine condition and came with the original leather case and both caps.

Used with a Fuji XE-1, jpgs, straight out of the camera except for resizing, some minor cropping and I tweaked exposure in a couple of instances (user error). The focus is a bit finicky but overall, I'm pleased. It's better than its price point. The last two shots were done using the macro setting. It was a gray day, so most taken at ISO 400, at 1/125 and between f. 4 and f. 8


Landscape (best I could do, I live in a suburban area):



Free choice:









Plants (no flowers this time of year) on macro setting:







PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2015 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Even if you paid $4 for the lens, you weren't robbed, those aren't bad pictures. There are some dreadful old cheap zooms out there, but some are full of surprises.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a Korean-made Albinar 80-200mm f/3.9 that I bought off eBay around six years ago for about $10. The reason why I bought it was because it was the first zoom I ever bought -- well not that same lens. The first one I bought was in Canon FD mount. I bought it in 1982 or 1983. The one I have now is identical to that first one but is in Nikon mount. Back when I bought the first one, I was such a noob at photography that to me a zoom was a zoom was a zoom. It didn't even occur to me that there was a quality component to be considered. Well, I suppose it did. I recall jonesing after a Canon 70-210mm f/4 but decided it was too much money and, besides, wouldn't this cheaper 80-200 be just as good? What did I know, eh? So I was blissfully ignorant as I went around snapping shots with it. But what was really pretty amazing about it was just how good of a zoom it really was. Which is why I decided to replace it about six years ago, when I started getting interested in using mf lenses on my DSLR.

Here are a couple of shots taken with the original zoom from 1983:

Taken in 1983. Trying out its closest focus 1:4 macro setting. An Alaskan Poppy. Canon AE-1, some sort of Kodak print film.


Taken in 1984. Sunset at Santa Barbara Beach. Canon A-1, Kodachrome 64.


Taken at Fomoso Drag Strip, circa 1983. Canon AE-1. Kodachrome 64.


I have lots more in my collection. I'm just not sure which I took with the 80-200. Tomorrow, if I think about it, I'll mount the lens on my NEX and shot some photos with that combination, so you can see how it works with a digital camera.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Page 10 of 10