Vivitar Series 1 in comparison

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

slick: Yes, the window. I must admit I don't know what the official definition of HDR is, if there is one. In my mind it doesn't need to be every aspect of the photo. I have seen HDR where everything was very even, and that didn't look good to me. I've corrected for the outdoors as seen through the window to look bright as one might expect when standing in that room with their eyes more adjusted to indoors, but not blown out as originally exposed. Likewise, I've adjusted the exposure indoors to look like what it might appear if you were there. Maybe not correct HDR by definition, but by my definition.

Russ: No thanks on the AF version. It's an interesting testament to the developing technology, but weight and speed are affected by the large AF mechanism. Besides, I've discovered that I like manual focus and manual diaphragm as it reminds me more of my early film days. In those times one had to think and work for the image. I enjoy the challenge.

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

Well, I dunno if this would rank as an "official definition" or not, but here's the link to what Wikipedia says HDR is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging

Me, I prefer doing HDRs such that they bring out detail that is otherwise lost in a "normal" photo. While I can appreciate some of the rather spectacular HDR techniques that are often demonstrated, I find that I prefer results that bring out what's hidden over the surreal, which has all-too-often become the norm when folks think of HDR.

Boomer, I appreciate very much your sharing your knowledge regarding the history of the Vivitar 90mm macro. Sounds like you know whereof you speak. I guess I'm gonna have to add one of these, or the Tokina equivalent, to my collection one of these days. Heh. Who knows? Perhaps I'll find one in a local shop like I found the subject Vivitar 105 . . .

hinnerker · Expire: 2015-08-09

Ok, here is another Series 1.. out of my collection.

Dont know if you have already introduced this in the discussion.

Its an impressiv lens with f2.8!!!! /35-85mm in M42 mount.

The VMC works not parfokal. That means you have to refocus everytime you change the focal length.

But the results are lovely.

and the crop shows the sharpness...

Here are some further informations...

http://www.mail-archive.com/pdml@pdml.net/msg78725.html

Cheers
Henry

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

That picture was shot wide open or close to it? I see the purple fringe and ghosting similar to my Series 1 200mm. Was that a 100% crop?

hinnerker · Expire: 2015-08-09

Russ · Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 432

I suppose I should take my Viv S-1 35-85 out for a serious lens test...

hinnerker · Expire: 2015-08-09

hinnerker · Expire: 2015-08-09

And a last one, showing the Viv S1 35-85mm/2.8 itself..

Cheers
Henry

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

The S1 35-85/2.8 is a great lens, and worth being acquired by any serious Vivitar collector. I owned one years ago -- I was a camera dealer and it was inventory -- and have been intrigued by it ever since. It is on my "buy" list again.

I'm curious how it compares optically with the S1 24-48/3.8. Seems to me that the pair would be ideal for most any photographic situation up to short tele requirements. Full frame, of course.

walter g · Joined: 20 Feb 2010 Posts: 2463 Location: NC, USA

I know about the Kiron made Vivitars, and the ones they made for Lester Dine.But I've not heard about ones made for Rikenon.

Please check out this one on Ebay.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Rikenon-P-Kiron-105mm-f-2-8-Macro-Lens-Pentax-K-Mount_W0QQitemZ330413787289QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item4cee324899

justtorchit · Joined: 12 Oct 2009 Posts: 269 Location: St. Louis, MO

It looks very similar to the earlier Vivitar Kiron-made lens, their 100mm f/2.8. I have actually been interested in testing one of these against the kiron/dine/viv series 1. I would believe they will be very similar!

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

I'm sure that was a great lens in its day. I have a sentimental thing for the Series 1 lenses, but I'm sticking with the primes. I try not to collect lenses, and in doing so try not to duplicate. I think my wife keeps a count of the lenses, so I have to hide one when another arrives (she can't tell the difference between lenses) Smile

I have a Minolta 35-105mm from the '80s that is superb. I know this is a MF forum, so the lens doesn't qualify, but it is my go-to lens for that range. In fact, I chose it as my one and only lens for an event last weekend where I didn't want to be carrying anything extra. I gave it a good workout, taking close to 400 pictures at the Amelia Island Concours. I was amazed at how well the lens did. Not a bit of flare or CA despite very challenging conditions with a bright sun and lots of reflective chrome. The sharpness is also exceptional. If I can't get away with a single prime, I'll use a lens like this one.

Russ · Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 432

justtorchit · Joined: 12 Oct 2009 Posts: 269 Location: St. Louis, MO

woodrim-

love those detail shots! looks like it was a gorgeous day too!

westromat · Joined: 10 Mar 2010 Posts: 9

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

Thanks, justtorchit, it was indeed a beautiful day.

westromat: The car was a Packard if my memory serves. It wasn't unusual to find cars from overseas. This is a premier event second only to Pebble Beach. More million dollar cars than you can shake a stick at. I think the (one and only) Jaguar XJ13 is valued at $20 million or more. Keep checking the gallery; I'm still adding images.

abaris · Joined: 29 Oct 2010 Posts: 3 Location: ny

fermy · Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

abaris: Thanks for the information as well as your assessment of the lenses, and welcome to this forum. I found some of your comments interesting, but must admit I have never done as in depth an assessment or comparison. I have three Series 1 lenses; 90/2.5, 135/2.3, and 200/3. I love them all. In fact, my Minolta mount 90mm is the single biggest reason I am considering a NEX camera. The other two are M42 and thus able to be used on my DSLR. The M42 version of the 90mm has escaped me within my self imposed cost limitations. Unfortunately, I cannot comment from personal experience on the 90mm beyond macro, for which it is superb.

I never attempted to compare the resolution of the 135mm and 200mm lenses, but can say in both cases they are the sharpest among my lenses in those focal lengths. I have limited vocabulary when it comes to the aberrations, calling them all CA. However, the distinctions are obvious to me when experiencing CA with other lenses, even if I don't identify it precisely. The lens that has come the closest to my 200mm in resolution is a Zeiss Sonnar 180/2.8 that I picked up this past year. A very nice lens indeed despite its size and weight, and it is plenty sharp, but I have noticed it having the red variety of CA which I find more difficult to correct than the blue that the Series 1 displays. The Zeiss is slightly faster at f/2.8 and more usable wide open, but the Series 1 is more practical to carry about. While I agree the wide open performance of the Series 1 200mm isn't wonderful, I have found it very usable in the right lighting conditions.

The 135mm Series 1 is outstanding in my opinion. Again, one must be selective where and how f/2.3 is used. Overall, I think the lens needs to be used with attention to its strengths and weaknesses, but when used with skill, it performs wonderfully. Bot this and the 200mm can be difficult to focus precisely, but I have gotten much better at it with practice.

Have you ever tried the Vivitar Komine made 28mm Close Focus?

This picture is a 50% crop, but I believe still demonstrates very well the 200/3 ability to crisply isolate a subject.

And this one taken recently in difficult lighting...

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

bob955i · Joined: 15 Apr 2007 Posts: 2495

Every company produces lemons Ian - less than stellar QC was the bane of the whole DDR/USSR photographic industry and I've even read of end-users having to return current Zeiss lenses for QC issues. The other aspect is that some of the lenses we eventually acquire may have suffered the indignity of a less than optimal 'repair' at some time.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Yes Bob, I just think it's important to let people know that Vivitar are particularly bad for QC. I know people have really good copies of the 2.3/135 and the 3.5/70-210 but there are also copies out there that are utter dogs.

I wouldn't buy a Vivitar again because I wouldn't want to take the risk of getting stuck with a truly awful lens and losing my money.

Of course, I've seen QC issues in other lines, I had a Pentacon 2.8/135 that was mediocre for instance, but also a couple of copies that were stellar.

However, I've never seen anything approaching the degree of variation in quality I've seen with Vivitar, and people need to know that. I'd want to try a Vivitar before I handed over my cash, I was very lucky not to get stuck with that rotten 2.3/135, I could have lost a fair sum on that lens.

2.3/135 100% crop, absolutely excreable:

3.5/70-210 100% crop, terribly soft:

2.8/28 100% crop, pretty bad, soft, contrastless:

People need to be told that Vivitar sold plenty of dire glass, surely?

bob955i · Joined: 15 Apr 2007 Posts: 2495

Not disputing that you've had a bad experience with Vivitar and yes by all means share the pain but my point was that it could easily have been with almost any other manufacturer, even high-end ones.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07