View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1318 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 4:58 pm Post subject: Classic Vivitar Superzooms review: 28-210mm & 28-200mm |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
So I acquired out of interest both the Cosina made 28-210mm f3.5-5.6 and the Kobori made 28-200mm f3.5-5.3. I have started writing up a bit of a comparison and will post it here but I would like to check on something first.
I put the lenses on my Lumix G1 to look at the parfocality (magnified focus assist is very good for that) and also take some shots at close focus. First I tried the kobori. At 28mm the pics were so bad I was assuming that the lens was faulty! This is the lens I mention in the cheap lens challenge thread and which I have partly dis-assembled. But when I tried the cosina - that was almost as bad. Here's some crops from test pics taken wide open at 28mm, 50mm, 70mm, 100mm 200mm.
At 200mm there was nothing wrong with IQ and the focus was correct at ~ 3.5m on the distance scale. Zooming to 28mm the focus drifts to 2.5m (=cfd) and the IQ goes to s**t. So what I want to know is whether this lack of IQ at 28mm close focus is corroborated by other users of these lenses, or is it something I did/something wrong with these lenses. I can add that the lenses were rather better at 28mm outdoors, landscapes ie distant focus _________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3705 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Could we exclude with absolute certainty that Bell's wasn't interfering conclusions reached ? _________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7796 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I recently traded my Vivitar 28-200 with Phil, so he might be able to help.
EDIT. You need to drink better whisky than that, every lens is wonderful with decent whisky. _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1318 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
Hic *8!! **** I absolutely refute any impertinent suggestions etc etc _________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dmedme
Joined: 31 Jan 2015 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Sat Jan 31, 2015 4:16 pm Post subject: Apparently poor performance at minimum focus distance |
|
|
dmedme wrote:
Marcus, I think your problem is that the indicated minimum focus distance for the Cosina 28-210mm f3.5-5.6 only applies in Macro mode, at the long end. At the short end MFD is more like 5 or 6 metres, maybe more.
I found it to be useless indoors; my house isn't big enough!
I took it in to the back garden, set it to the MFD, photographed the lawn, and looked for where the grass stalks were in sharp focus, hence my estimate. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1318 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
Further test shots G1: I was about a meter and a half from the start of the hedge, hedge length about 30m. at no point is the hedge sharp. lens at cfd. kobori top. resized. Whats going on?
Both lenses start being sharp at ~50mm zoom
_________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
I have the Kobori.
At 28mm it has a very short focus throw from mfd to infinity of only around 30 degrees of focus travel.
Macro is unavailable at 28 - only at 200mm.
The minimum focus distance at 28mm is going to be just under 2.5 metres.
Have you tried this lens on a DSLR for which it has the fitted mount?
Mine is for Nikon AI.
Here is a quick pic from a few moments ago on the D300.
Shot at 28mm at closest focusing distance.
OH
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
PhantomLord
Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 472 Location: Szczecin, Poland
|
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PhantomLord wrote:
Hi Marcus,
I had the Kobori version and it was quite good lens, of course if you bare in mind that's old 28-200 zoom lens .
Images you've posted indicate that there's something wrong, either:
a) with the lenses (which I doubt)
b) with the adapter - try those lenses on other camera with lens's native mount - as OH said
c) with your focusing ability - but I doubt it too, because you had to be useless to achieve such results with good lenses .
In my opinion, this Kobori made lens was really good and delivered really nice photos. I've sold it because I prefer better quality of two lenses (let's say 28-90 and 70-210 Vivitar's S1), but I still regard it was more than capable of providing good photos as OH presented.
Here are a few photos I've attached to the auction when I was selling the lens:
#1
Vivitar 28-200mm-6 by lens-test, on Flickr
#2
Vivitar 28-200mm-8 by lens-test, on Flickr
#3
Vivitar 28-200mm-5 by lens-test, on Flickr
#4
Vivitar 28-200mm-4 by lens-test, on Flickr
#5
Vivitar 28-200mm-1 by lens-test, on Flickr
#6
Vivitar 28-200mm-2 by lens-test, on Flickr _________________ Mateusz
No good story ever starts with drinking tea.
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Yes, I am inclined to think that it might be your adapter that is the problem as you are getting the same poor results from both lenses.
I once had the Cosina version and it was not bad either, not as good as the Kobori.
I did a comparison between these as well as the Kiron version, and posted it here on the forum, but I am blowed if I can find it ATM
OH
PS - found it at last:
http://forum.mflenses.com/three-early-super-zooms-quite-pic-heavy-t60775,highlight,+early,start,15.html
The search engine for the forum is #@!*^^$
It does not like me anyway |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7796 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I used the 28-200 Komine / Vivitar on my Pentax K10 for a long time, it was one of the first manual lenses I bought, and I had decent results from it. The one touch focusing was extremely sensitive on the 29-200 and I took to using a Vivitar 80-200 / 4 and a Series 1 24-48 / 3.8. I still have both lenses.
Both of these pictures were taken with the K10 back in 2009 and probably aren't processed much, almost certainly not sharpened.
I used the 28-200 a great deal, it was my walkabout lens for a long time. _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1318 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
The PK to M4/3 adapter I am using on the G1 generally lets lenses focus slightly past infinity ....certainly something like that is going on because the pics are way better on my pentax. Not as good at 28mm as some of the ones posted but within the range of what one would expect...
Just put the smc 50mm on the g1 with the adapter just to check. Focus range etc entirely as expected.
I've been scrutinising the lenses and there is no sign of anything amiss with either. I will try to figure this out a bit more ...
Thanks for the comments and pics _________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
marcusBMG wrote: |
The PK to M4/3 adapter I am using on the G1 generally lets lenses focus slightly past infinity ....certainly something like that is going on because the pics are way better on my pentax. Not as good at 28mm as some of the ones posted but within the range of what one would expect...
Just put the smc 50mm on the g1 with the adapter just to check. Focus range etc entirely as expected.
I've been scrutinising the lenses and there is no sign of anything amiss with either. I will try to figure this out a bit more ...
Thanks for the comments and pics |
Do you have a PK 28mm lens that you can try on your adapter?
I wonder if it has something to do with that focal length.
You mentioned that the zooms come into focus at around 50mm anyway.
A puzzle for sure
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PhantomLord
Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 472 Location: Szczecin, Poland
|
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
PhantomLord wrote:
marcusBMG wrote: |
Not as good at 28mm as some of the ones posted but within the range of what one would expect... |
Among the photos I've posted, the #3 is for 100% sure shot at 28mm, but stopped down to f/5.6. To be honest at short end this lens was very good, although showed a lot of distortion (you could see that on the vertical pole on the #3 photo). My copy was a lot better in terms of sharpness and contrast at the short end than at long end, however at 200mm stopped at f/8 results were satisfying.
From your results, well no results, it's suspicious that someone might have tampered inside those lenses. Did you get those from the same seller?
Also if the lens is focusing ok on the long end and not on the short end it's possible that infinity focus regulation on short end is somehow badly made.
Generally zoom lenses have two infinity focus adjustments. For the long end it's usually done by adjusting front end of the lens on the focusing helicoid, either by loosing the stop screw or by something different. For the short end, adjustments are usually made by a set of washers put somewhere between rear group elements and rest of the lens.
I had the Tokina 28-85 lens that was focusing perfectly ok in the range of ~50-85mm, while at 28mm it was absolutely impossible to focus - nothing was sharp, just like at your example. I put a few thin washers between the rear group (prime group of the lens) and rest of the lens and suddenly everything was in place. (Of course it was still a little bit off, but it was due to the thickness of the washers and it's just the job of matching good thickness to particular lens.)
LLoydy: This shot of red boiler is brilliant. The colours and the structure of old machinery - it's a great capture.
Mateusz |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
PhantomLord wrote: |
marcusBMG wrote: |
Not as good at 28mm as some of the ones posted but within the range of what one would expect... |
Among the photos I've posted, the #3 is for 100% sure shot at 28mm, but stopped down to f/5.6. To be honest at short end this lens was very good, although showed a lot of distortion (you could see that on the vertical pole on the #3 photo). My copy was a lot better in terms of sharpness and contrast at the short end than at long end, however at 200mm stopped at f/8 results were satisfying.
From your results, well no results, it's suspicious that someone might have tampered inside those lenses. Did you get those from the same seller?
Also if the lens is focusing ok on the long end and not on the short end it's possible that infinity focus regulation on short end is somehow badly made.
Generally zoom lenses have two infinity focus adjustments. For the long end it's usually done by adjusting front end of the lens on the focusing helicoid, either by loosing the stop screw or by something different. For the short end, adjustments are usually made by a set of washers put somewhere between rear group elements and rest of the lens.
I had the Tokina 28-85 lens that was focusing perfectly ok in the range of ~50-85mm, while at 28mm it was absolutely impossible to focus - nothing was sharp, just like at your example. I put a few thin washers between the rear group (prime group of the lens) and rest of the lens and suddenly everything was in place. (Of course it was still a little bit off, but it was due to the thickness of the washers and it's just the job of matching good thickness to particular lens.)
LLoydy: This shot of red boiler is brilliant. The colours and the structure of old machinery - it's a great capture.
Mateusz |
Yes, you may be correct.
But it is odd that both lenses are giving problems at the short end.
I still think that it might be either the adapter or a problem with the 28mm setting on the G1.
The performance at the 200mm end for the Kobori is also very good indeed.
Here are a couple of samples
OH
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1318 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
On the pentax K5 the lenses behave normally. f3.5, 28mm CFD kobori top. I can see that a lens might be sensitive enough to the registration distance that the slightly imprecise M4/3 adapter has affected the focus zone that much but it's unexpected.
This was with the kobori at cfd, 28mm f3.5 resized - IQ not far off the other posted pics.
_________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4745 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
I've have had a few of the 28-200's and all have peformed exceptionally well. No out of focus when zooming. I have used mine for video on the NEX5/A6000 and its spot on. The one I got from Lloydy is marvellous. Can't fault it. For the price. _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7796 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
philslizzy wrote: |
I've have had a few of the 28-200's and all have peformed exceptionally well. No out of focus when zooming. I have used mine for video on the NEX5/A6000 and its spot on. The one I got from Lloydy is marvellous. Can't fault it. For the price. |
I think that when I tried it on the A6000 I was probably expecting a dramatic improvement over the K10 - which it was very good on - and I didn't see what I hoped for. It's a good lens, I should have given it a better chance. _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
attilio
Joined: 26 Apr 2017 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:09 am Post subject: Re: Classic Vivitar Superzooms review: 28-210mm & 28-200 |
|
|
attilio wrote:
I recently bought the Kobori made (77x serial number) 28-200 mm version in Nikon mount for a few euros for use on my D600. The lens was in good mechanical shape, except that:
- The images were lacking contrast, which I solved by opening up the rear group from the lens tail and cleaning up the lenses with some spectacles cleaner. Now images are far more contrasty.
- By design, the minimum focusing distance at any focal length but 200 mm is 2.5 m, which makes this lens practically useless in a number of situations when closer focus is needed. I really felt I got a lemon, but luckily I solved this problem as follows. First, I opened up the lens as suggested at this link:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/vivitar-28-200mm-f3-5-5-3.html
after having unscrewed the inner barrel with the focal lengths marks upon it, I removed the lens mount which is hold to the lens main body with just four screws. At that point, I turned the inner barrel until it could be extracted pulling towards the lens rear end. I found at this point that this inner barrel has a 1 cm prong at the end that usually stays hidden that prevents the lens from focusing closer than 2.5 m at shorter focal lengths. So, I took a small hacksaw and got rid of the prong, then recomposed the lens following the inverse procedure used to disassemble it. The lens now focuses < 2.5 m at any focal length. The only drawback is that for focal lengths < 70 mm you get some vignetting at the corners, at least on my D600, which is perhaps the ultimate reason the lens was prevented to focus < 2.5 m at < 200 mm. Below are some photos of the lens focusing at the center of the image at about 1.5 m and for focal lengths of 28, 35, 50, 70, 100 and 135 mm: notice how the vignetting effect goes away as the focal length increases.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|