Please give me your opinion of this Vivitar 400/5.6

[revers]

I received my Vivitar 400/5.6 in mint condition this morning. Reviews I read pretty much discounted this lens as a poor performer. No wildlife about this morning so I just picked a few things about the yard to try it out. All but the CA test were shot wide open @ f5.6 & the distance to subject are approximate. I applied my normal post processing to all shots.

I used a cable release with this set-up.





1. 25'





2. 50', focus on leaves on table.





3. 75', focus on bench.





4. 100', focus on weather vain.





5. CA test, 125', f11

[revers]

I am disappointed in the folks here, 48 views & not a single reply to my request. There are very knowledgeable folk here that I was counting on to give me an opinion. Is it that bad that nobody wants to say so?

[Attila]

Looks to me a very fine lens on this size, pixel peeping can say more about fine details. Usually reault getting lot worst on similar lenses.

[revers]

Thanks Attila.

After I bought it, I found that the early version (Komine made) that I bid on, was considered soft with high high CA. That is why I did the CA test, as this is what I believe is supposed to show it. If I am in error, please advise.

[Riku]

You need to post bigger pictures or 100% size crops. Then we can judge the lens.

[luisalegria]

You would see CA problems mainly in a crop also.

What I would be looking at would be just the old 1:1 pixel-peeping. Its hard to tell one tele from another without it.

But then I am not good at noticing anything else !

[Kathmandu]

Ron,

Just chiming in here, 48 views and no replies does not mean should not get you too disappointed-considering the geographical diversity of the members here. Of the 48- you have lots that visited the page via a search for that lens-and who may not necessarily be a member here right?


Having said that I believe the weather vane @100 ft. is pretty sharp and is showing good color tones,as far as as your CA test ;maybe you can crop a portion of that image and upload it to get a better look.

Best regards eh

[Minolfan]

I used the Komine made 400mm Vivitar some years for pictures of sailing races. The lens was a lot better in IQ and handling then the Typonar preset 400mm 6.3 I used before. And then a sturdy and heavy Accura I tested and didn't buy, because that one was too soft and less sharp.
I was quit satisfied by the results. I still have the lens, but not used for some time as it is in MD mount and doesn't fit on my DSLR. Deserves fresh air again for some birding on one of my film Minoltas.

I felt a bit ashamed not to have done yet when I saw your post, sorry for not reacting faster.

May be I should try the lens with teleconverter on DSLR too (I have the Minolta converter-s in a drawer) however that is a difficult combo to handle on APS-C: 2x400x1,5 . Need a block of concrete as a tripod?

[woodrim]

f/11 isn't the aperture for testing CA, wide open or a stop down is. Looks pretty decent to me.

[martinsmith99]

[Scheimpflug]

[revers]

Here I present the weather vain as shot, only converted to jpeg & re-sized.








A crop of the above :






I will re-shoot the CA test when the fog clears. [/img]

[ManualFocus-G]

I presume it's the Tokina version you have?

As already discussed, the small images produced with pp earlier are not particularly helpful, but the last shot backs up what I have read and seen before...not too much contrast wide open and a bit soft. I had the Soligor version of this Tokina and found it difficult to focus because of the low contrast.

I now have the Komine version which is supposed to be better. Personally, I don't think the Komine is very good wipe open either, but it's an improvement nonetheless.

All that said, if you can focus OK with it reliably and have some decent pp, the lens could be very useful indeed

[revers]

This lens is made by Komine.

As you say, perhaps it can be saved by PP.

[ChromaticAberration]

Being a fan of that dying practice of using as least PP as you can when you are trying to show what lens is capable of I must say it is not very impressive, but then again, most people are already badly used to seeing PP'd photos and when they see the raw version they get disappointed.

[revers]

It is overcast but I redid the CA test wide open anyway.




Maybe not enough contrast with the grey sky?

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

It would be interesting to redo the shots on a brighter day. With some lenses, I see more CA on bright days than on cloudy ones. From the larger images, the lens looks ok for its period. Not bad, not amazing either. Which isn't surprising. Can't expect these lenses to compete with high end modern designs. Old lenses are most competitive in 24-135mm range - outside that, you might find the odd old but excellent performer, but it's a rare event.

[Pancolart]

Sharpness wide open is usable, especially for BW. CA is strong though. K10D, F5.6:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-Gs7BQI8lKsM/Tah0Z3iEeCI/AAAAAAAACcg/jBEaWvC48m0/s1280/bw009.jpeg

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Mpq8N9C_Jrk/Tah0-CWQmAI/AAAAAAAACdM/E9THEp_j-5E/s1280/bw020.jpeg

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-JZQjN-tvt20/Tahz5yrYszI/AAAAAAAACb8/8_CY_7C5FwU/s1280/bw056.jpeg

[revers]

Thanks for the feedback folks. Seems the reviews I read after I bought the lens were true, soft & bad CA.

[David]

How good is your camera's IQ? What I mean to ask is, are you planning to take photos with this lens and print them as posters or as 8X10 or 11X14 prints? If the latter, it ought to be fine. If you want to make billboards to paper your walls with, this lens may not hold up.

I have a Vivitar 6.3, and it's a fine lens (even though it vignettes with the hood extended and can be tricky to focus.) However, it has limitations and on learning to work WITH those limitations has helped me use it well. Here are three photos I took with it and a quick description of each:


This is a refinery about nine miles from where I took the shot. Also, the K-7 has a 1.5 crop, so the lens functions like a 600mm, but still. It looks close. Not a great shot, though, and my Vivitar 400, at least, is not great for distance shots. I took it to a Giants game recently and mounted it to my RT. About 60% of the photos were too blurry due to camera shake and only have 100 ISO film to use at night. Oops. I've bought 400 since then. Anyway, Here the vignetting isn't so bad, but it's also only so-so on long-range shots due to atmospheric haze. For additional reference, that hazy peak in the background is 41.62 miles from where I took the photo. All this, I suspect is a refresher.


This little guy was about 28 feet from me -- just a few feet beyond the minimum focal distance of 25 feet. So at close range the lens worked well. It was not superb for capturing the bird in action and is best suited for still shots. But you can see a nice, milky bokeh that characterizes many Vivitar lenses.


This is the best photo I've captured with my 400. This guy was about 225 feet away and this is about 85% of the full frame. Focusing on him was VERY tough and of about 200 shots maybe 18 turned out. These Vivitar 400s have problems, it seems, with large DoF, even on the lower stops. But at dusk, when f6.3 is a must, if's even harder.

For my Vivitar 400, it has the largest operating range from about 10:00 AM till a couple hours before dusk. That said, it captures colors most purely at dusk and at the same time has the fewest chromatic aberrations or contrast flacidity.

One last shot:

Try a moon shot with your lens stopped fully down, as this one was. My Vivitar 400 has a suitable hyperfocal distance for shots like this moon shot. With a tiny aperture and the focus set to about the middle of the moon's focal plane, most of the orb is well focused.

In short, my Vivitar 400 is never leaving my collection. Period. It's my most capable telephoto and works on every camera I own (or will once I get a Nikon-M42 adapter.) The class on these things is great and when used properly, with correct lighting, and a suitable subject, the lens is going to keep you happy for a long time. But it's useful range is much narrower than many lenses.

[Riku]

[revers]

Here is one I shot @ f11. The subject is about a 100' away. Slightly cropped.

[David]

Your gray squirrel shot looks great. I agree that your lens is a definite keeper.

[jl-c]

I loved this lens, I used it for many years on my Canon T90's. Recently I joined the dark side and bought a Nikon D7000 and thought, why not use that 400mm with it, so having bought a Canon FD to Nikon converter I dug out my 400mm lens to find it badly fungus infected. Does anyone know how to strip and rebuild it? I know sometimes fungus etches the glass but I would like to try anyway. I like the lens!!
I have mailed Vivitar but as yet have not had an answer. My abject apologies for hijacking the thread but I thought if you were interested in this lens then someone may know how to 'revive it' !
I think the published pictures are fine for what they are, after all it is 1980's technology and it wasn't the most costly lens back then!
Thanks for any help,
Jonathan

[Pancolart]

Just use your chainsaw!

Joke aside, it's much better you buy healthy specimen with Nikon mount.