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

VIVITAR SERIES 1 PATENTS
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 2:53 pm    Post subject: VIVITAR SERIES 1 PATENTS Reply with quote

Opcon patents :

Vivitar "flat field" 90/180 (which was top quality but not flat field !)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4145115.pdfl

Vivitar 24/48
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4159165.pdf[/url]

Vivitar 28/90 2.8-3.5 and presumely 28/105
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/RE32923.pdf

Vivitar 75/200 AF
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4620774.pdf

Vivitar 450/4.5 (if you looks closely : aperture 6.0)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4523816.pdf


Non opcon patent
Vivitar 600+800 catadioptric solid
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3700310.pdf


PostPosted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Like 1 Like 1


PostPosted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:51 am    Post subject: most interesting Reply with quote

This Perkin Elmer patent is somewhat more informative than the little other internet info available on this device.The idea of the two compensating front elements may have come from the graphically similar Zeiss construction The two or three Vivitar varieties were shorter than the 1400millimetres that is described here, while some were apparently made of transparent plastic, -presumably not as heavy.

p.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 1:00 pm    Post subject: Re: VIVITAR SERIES 1 PATENTS Reply with quote

Opcon patents :
on italic: updates on 30/12/2020

Vivitar S1 28mm 1.9
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4099849.pdf
which is really different from tokina/soligor cd 28mm f2 even if the vivitar was manufactured by tokina and sold at the same period



Vivitar S1 135MM 2.3 /200 mm 3.0
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3942876.pdf
The patent describes a similar 300mm F:4.5 never marketed


Vivitar 25-105 3.6/25-125 3.6 NEVER MARKETED
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4299454.pdf
What a extraordinary lens if marketed (certainly as 24/105 3.5 or 24/135 3.5) during period 1982/1983.. Why never markedted : too expensive ? Not good enough ?


Vivitar S1 70/210 3.5 (1st kino version)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3817600.pdf
You can see on the patent :
that a kino guy is co-inventor, certainly for the mechanical part
that the max focal lenght is 205mm (not 210).. The actual lens was ~80/205mm 3.7 (far from the claimed 70/210 3.5 and very very close from the well known 85/205 3.8 kino -sold as vivitar, soligor, panagor... certainly not a coincidence)


Vivitar S1 "flat field" 90/180 (which was top quality but not flat field !)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4145115.pdf

On the patent: you can see some main differences with an usual tele-zoom:
group 2 is fixed (usually group 2 is the main zoom element)
The main lens = fixed group 5 is complex with 6 or 7 elements (usually is group4 with 2/3 elements)


Vivitar S1 24/48
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4159165.pdf

Vivitar S1 28/90 2.8-3.5 and presumely the derivatives : 28/85 (kiron/vivitar) 28/105 (kiron/vivitar/cosina) and 28/135 (cosina/vivitar)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/RE32923.pdf

Vivitar S1 75/200 AF
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4620774.pdf

Vivitar S1 450/4.5 (if you looks closely : aperture 6.0)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4523816.pdf


Non opcon patent
Vivitar 600+800 catadioptric solid
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3700310.pdf


Last edited by PBFACTS on Wed Aug 02, 2023 8:11 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2023 4:47 pm    Post subject: Re: VIVITAR SERIES 1 PATENTS Reply with quote

Opcon patents :
on italic: updates on 01/08/2023

Vivitar S1 24/48
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4159165.pdf

Vivitar 25-105 3.6/25-125 3.6 NEVER MARKETED
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4299454.pdf
What a extraordinary lens if marketed (certainly as 24/105 3.5 or 24/135 3.5) during period 1982/1983.. Why never markedted : too expensive ? Not good enough ?

Vivitar S1 28mm 1.9
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4099849.pdf
which is really different from tokina/soligor cd 28mm f2 even if the vivitar was manufactured by tokina and sold at the same period

Vivitar S1 28/90 2.8-3.5 and presumely the derivatives : 28/85 (kiron/vivitar) 28/105 (kiron/vivitar/cosina) and 28/135 (cosina/vivitar)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/RE32923.pdf


Vivitar S1 90/2.5 (The lens used in the commercial version is #10 in the patent and was a f:1.9 ; exactly the same on the commercial version ? (i presume that no otherwise Vivitar would have claimed the 1.9 aperture)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3942875.pdf


Vivitar S1 135MM 2.3 /200 mm 3.0
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3942876.pdf
The patent describes a similar 300mm F:4.5 never marketed

Vivitar S1 70/210 3.5 (1st kino version)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3817600.pdf
You can see on the patent :
that a kino guy is co-inventor for the mechanical part
that the max focal lenght is 205mm (not 210).. The actual lens was ~80/205mm 3.7 (far from the claimed 70/210 3.5 and very very close from the well known 85/205 3.8 kino -sold as vivitar, soligor, panagor... certainly not a coincidence)

Vivitar S1 "flat field" 90/180 (which was top quality but not flat field !)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4145115.pdf

On the patent: you can see some main differences with an usual tele-zoom:
    The number of elements 18 instead of 12/13 (sometimes 14 to 16 but never 18 at that period)
    5 groups instead oft he usual 4 groups (focus/zoom/compensator/main)

    group 2 is fixed (usually group 2 is the main zoom element)
    The main lens (the last group) is #5 and is complex with 6 or 7 elements (usually is group4 with 2/3 elements)

Vivitar S1 75/200 AF
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4620774.pdf

Vivitar S1 450/4.5
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4523816.pdf


Non opcon patent
Vivitar S1 600+ S1 800 catadioptric solid "solid cat"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3700310.pdf


Last edited by PBFACTS on Wed Aug 02, 2023 8:18 am; edited 10 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2023 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Like 1 Thank you!


PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2023 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for posting.

The drawings of the 1st Kino series 1 70-210 were a bit on the educational side!

-D.S.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2023 10:26 am    Post subject: VIVITAR SERIES 1 PATENTS Reply with quote

on italic: updates on August 2023

Vivitar S1 24/48
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4159165.pdf

Vivitar 25-105 3.6/25-125 3.6 NEVER MARKETED
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4299454.pdf
What a extraordinary lens if marketed (certainly as 24/105 3.5 or 24/135 3.5) during period 1982/1983.. Why never markedted : too expensive ? Not good enough ?

Vivitar S1 28mm 1.9
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4099849.pdf
which is really different from tokina/soligor cd 28mm f2 even if the vivitar was manufactured by tokina and sold at the same period

Vivitar S1 28/90 2.8-3.5 and presumely the derivatives : 28/85 (kiron/vivitar) 28/105 (kiron/vivitar/cosina) and 28/135 (cosina/vivitar)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/RE32923.pdf


Vivitar S1 90/2.5 (The lens used in the commercial version is #10 in the patent and was a f:1.9 ; exactly the same on the commercial version ? (i presume that no otherwise Vivitar would have claimed the 1.9 aperture)
The 1.9 aperture was the main subject of the patent (not the macro side)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3942875.pdf


Vivitar S1 135MM 2.3 /200 mm 3.0
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3942876.pdf
The patent describes a similar 300mm F:4.5 never marketed

Vivitar S1 70/210 3.5 (1st kino version)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3817600.pdf
You can see on the patent :
that a kino guy is co-inventor for the mechanical part
that the max focal lenght is 205mm (not 210).. The actual lens was ~80/205mm 3.7 (far from the claimed 70/210 3.5 and very very close from the well known 85/205 3.8 kino -sold as vivitar, soligor, panagor... certainly not a coincidence)

Vivitar S1 70/210 2.8/4.0 (3rd Komine version)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4758073.pdf
The production lens is #4
You can see on the patent that the max focal lenght is ~204mm (not 210)
It is more honest that the actual range of the kino version (80/205) but selling it as a 70/205 would have been more honest but it would not then have been the successor to the famous 70-210 which from a marketing point of view was unacceptable.

Vivitar S1 "flat field" 90/180 (which was top quality but not flat field !)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4145115.pdf

On the patent: you can see some main differences with an usual tele-zoom:
    The number of elements 18 instead of 12/13 (sometimes 14 to 16 but never 18 at that period)
    5 groups instead oft he usual 4 groups (focus/zoom/compensator/main)

    group 2 is fixed (usually group 2 is the main zoom element)
    The main lens (the last group) is #5 and is complex with 6 or 7 elements (usually is group4 with 2/3 elements)

Vivitar S1 75/200 AF
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4620774.pdf

Vivitar S1 450/4.5
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4523816.pdf


Non opcon patent
Vivitar S1 600+ S1 800 catadioptric solid "solid cat"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3700310.pdf[/quote]


PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2023 4:59 pm    Post subject: Re: VIVITAR SERIES 1 PATENTS Reply with quote

PBFACTS wrote:

...
The actual lens was ~80/205mm 3.7 (far from the claimed 70/210 3.5 and very very close from the well known 85/205 3.8 kino -sold as vivitar, soligor, panagor... certainly not a coincidence)

...

It is more honest that the actual range of the kino version (80/205) but selling it as a 70/205 would have been more honest but it would not then have been the successor to the famous 70-210 which from a marketing point of view was unacceptable.


Pretty common practise, aslo with renowned brands such as Zeiss Oberkochen. The Zeiss CY was actually 72-203mm (although f3.5 was correct). Usually a 5% deviation from the correct values was considered acceptable.

S


PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2024 4:48 pm    Post subject: Re: VIVITAR SERIES 1 PATENTS Reply with quote

PBFACTS wrote:
on italic: updates on August 2024

Vivitar S1 24/48
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4159165.pdf

Vivitar 25-105 3.6/25-125 3.6 NEVER MARKETED + 28/135 marketed as NOT S1
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4299454.pdf
What a extraordinary lens if marketed (certainly as 24/105 3.5 or 24/135 3.5) during period 1982/1983.. Why never markedted : too expensive ? Not good enough ?

Vivitar S1 28mm 1.9
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4099849.pdf
which is really different from tokina/soligor cd 28mm f2 even if the vivitar was manufactured by tokina and sold at the same period

Vivitar S1 28/90 2.8-3.5 and presumely the derivatives : 28/85 (kiron/vivitar) 28/105 (kiron/vivitar/cosina) and 28/135 (cosina/vivitar)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/RE32923.pdf


Vivitar S1 90/2.5 (The lens used in the commercial version is #10 in the patent and was a f:1.9 ; exactly the same on the commercial version ? (i presume that no otherwise Vivitar would have claimed the 1.9 aperture)
The 1.9 aperture was the main subject of the patent (not the macro side)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3942875.pdf

Vivitar S1 135MM 2.3 /200 mm 3.0
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3942876.pdf
The patent describes a similar 300mm F:4.5 never marketed

Vivitar S1 70/210 3.5 (1st kino version)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/3817600.pdf
You can see on the patent :
that a kino guy is co-inventor for the mechanical part
that the max focal lenght is 205mm (not 210).. The actual lens was ~80/205mm 3.7 (far from the claimed 70/210 3.5 and very very close from the well known 85/205 3.8 kino -sold as vivitar, soligor, panagor... certainly not a coincidence)

Vivitar S1 70/210 2.8/4.0 (3rd Komine version)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4758073.pdf
The production lens is #4
You can see on the patent that the max focal lenght is ~204mm (not 210)
It is more honest that the actual range of the kino version (80/205) but selling it as a 70/205 would have been more honest but it would not then have been the successor to the famous 70-210 which from a marketing point of view was unacceptable.

Vivitar S1 "flat field" 90/180 (which was top quality but not flat field !)
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/4145115.pdf

On the patent: you can see some main differences with an usual tele-zoom:
    The number of elements 18 instead of 12/13 (sometimes 14 to 16 but never 18 at that period)
    5 groups instead oft he usual 4 groups (focus/zoom/compensator/main)
    group 2 is fixed (usually group 2 is the main zoom element)
    The main lens (the last group) is #5 and is complex with 6 or 7 elements (usually is group4 with 2/3 elements)

Vivitar S1 75/200 AF
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4620774.pdf

Vivitar S1 450/4.5
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4523816.pdf


Non opcon patent
Vivitar S1 600+ S1 800 catadioptric solid "solid cat"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3700310.pdf


Please not that the patent indicated on the 28/135 non s1 (cosina made) is the n°4299454 (the one of the 25/105 - 25/125 projects)


An cheaper adaptation of the 25/125 with range shifted to 28/135 ? and why non S1 (quality ? marketing before an incredible S1 24/125-135 ?)