Vivitar series 1 lens opinions

elekm · Jan 22, 2010

One of the lenses that I bought back in the 1970s was a Vivitar Series 1 35-85 variable focus lens. It isn't a true zoom, as you must refocus as you change the focal length.

It's a very heavy lens, but fast at f/2.8 through the zoom range.

There is noticeable barrel distortion at the wide end. A nice lens. It can flare, because of that huge front element.

I shot this around 1980. The original is on K25, and I've converted it to black and white.

Pumal · Jan 23, 2010

I have 35-70 Canon Zoom that I use with my F-1 and is excelent

benjiboy · Jan 23, 2010

I have the Series 1 70-210 f3.5 zoom the second version made by Tokina in Canon FD fitting, the Image quality is wonderful, and the I.Q will give most of the Camera manufacturers marque lenses a run for their money,, which was what the Series 1 range were designed to do, indeed I have the Canon FD 20-210 lens but the S1 is better, the build quality is first class, the only drawback is because they have all metal barrels they are quite heavy.

Russ - SVP · Jan 23, 2010

Left to right:
Vivitar Series 1 (Kiron model), f/3.5
Vivitar Series 1 (Tokina model), f/3.5
Vivitar Series 1 (Komine model), f/2.8-4
Kiron 70-210. f/4 with Zoom-lock

Regarding Viv S-1 glass. There are numerous (8) Series 1, 70-210 lenses. However, for the sake of discussion, we will deal with the first three. The following editions are nothing to seriously consider, so we will concentrate on the first three editions, which are the good one's. The 4th & 5th editions are also 2.8-4 variable aperture model's, but lacking in construction quality (Cosina built). Due to the fact that the third one is a variable aperture lens, (2.8-4) it will be somewhat sharper than a fixed aperture lenses. It is much easier to design and build a quality variable aperture lens.

The first edition was designed by Vivitar (Ellis Betensky of NASA Optics fame), had a hand in it, and it was built by Kiron. (67mm filter) It is a professional caliber lens, with a 1:2 macro feature built into it. It was the first zoom, designed with the aid of computers, that truly rivaled the OEM lenses of the time. That was in "76."

The second edition (my personal favorite) was built by Tokina, per, Vivitars specs. It too, is a fixed 3.5 aperture, but smaller, lighter and sharper. (62mm filter size). I really like it because of the fixed 3.5 aperture which is nice for focusing in dim light and long range flash work. However, not a true macro, 1:4 life size.

The third edition was made by Komine, and like the first two, is very well built. It is a 2.8-4 variable aperture lens, and the sharpest of the bunch. It has 1:2.5 life size macro from 100-210mm's, with a working distance of about two feet. Which can be quite useful. Can you see a discernible difference in slides taken with either one of them? No! Don't get caught up in bench tests. Any of the first three editions will give you professional-publishable images. I really like this lens, and over time, has become my favorite of the line.

Personally, I recommend the second or third edition of the line. I have and use all three of the first editions, and can highly recommend any one of them. Superb optics and construction.

Also, the Kiron 70-210 f/4, is a splendid performer.

QLP (Kiron Kid & MrVivSeries1)

Vincenzo Maielli · Feb 28, 2010

Generally speaking, the Vivitar Series 1 lenses are good, particularly the 135/2.3. Another good pair of zooms are the Vivitar Series 1 28-105/2.8-4 and 70-210/2.8-4 (my brother own both).
Ciao.
Vincenzo

BobD · Feb 28, 2010

I have a non-Series 1 Vivitar 135/2.8 and a 135/2.5, both made by Tokina
and both are excellent lenses. The 2.5 is especially nice and it's smaller than
the 2.8!

ulysses · Mar 14, 2010

I have two of these 70-210 series I lenses, and now, thanks to the Kiron Kid, I know a bit more about their origins. I have the Kiron-built 3.5 in a slightly corroded (but still very usable) Minolta MD mount, and the Komine-built 2.8-4 in Nikon AIS mount (very minty, I bought that one new many years ago.) I've always thought well of the latter, and bought the former because of it's reputation in rec.photo. I also have a 28-105 which I like and is sharp but has some barrel distortion (which is less of a problem than it used to be.) Very nice glass at bargain-basement prices, even new (compared to the Minolta and Nikon glass back then.) Back in the day, there were two reasons to buy third-party lenses. Cost was one, but it was often not possible to get the zoom range or speed from the manufacturers own lenses. I guess that's still true to some extent, since I was able to buy a Sigma 8mm fish-eye new recently, and while Nikon still lists one, when was the last time you actually saw a new one offered for sale (and who could afford it anyway?)

benjiboy · Mar 14, 2010

ulysses said:
I have two of these 70-210 series I lenses, and now, thanks to the Kiron Kid, I know a bit more about their origins. I have the Kiron-built 3.5 in a slightly corroded (but still very usable) Minolta MD mount, and the Komine-built 2.8-4 in Nikon AIS mount (very minty, I bought that one new many years ago.) I've always thought well of the latter, and bought the former because of it's reputation in rec.photo. I also have a 28-105 which I like and is sharp but has some barrel distortion (which is less of a problem than it used to be.) Very nice glass at bargain-basement prices, even new (compared to the Minolta and Nikon glass back then.) Back in the day, there were two reasons to buy third-party lenses. Cost was one, but it was often not possible to get the zoom range or speed from the manufacturers own lenses. I guess that's still true to some extent, since I was able to buy a Sigma 8mm fish-eye new recently, and while Nikon still lists one, when was the last time you actually saw a new one offered for sale (and who could afford it anyway?)

The Series I lenses in those days were in the same price bracket as the marque lenses from the camera makers they were commissioned by Vivitar (Ponder and Best) to be computed in Silicon Valley, and made by the leading Japanese optical firms to beat them at their own game, and they did, they are great glass that you can get very cheaply these days .

dynachrome · Mar 14, 2010

Vivitar Series 1 lenses

This thread seems to have come back to life. I saw a 450mm f/4.5 Series 1 lens on eBay in the last day or so. I have an odd device for it. It's a Vivitar 2X Macro Focusing teleconverter. This is not the later model which came in various camera mounts. This one is in T mount and comes with a small allen wrench to adjust the orientation of the lens. The combination gives you a 900mm f/9 with pretty close focusing for such a long lens.

Russ - SVP · Mar 14, 2010

I just burned a roll today with my Viv Series 1, 70-210 (#3 Komine edition). Damn, that lens is sharp! And has quality 1:2.5 macro too. In all honesty, the Tokina and Komine versions, stand up to todays modern optics.

Kiron Kid

dynachrome · Mar 14, 2010

This past week I took delivery of a 28-85mm f/2.8-3.8 Kiron in Konica AR mount. It seems to be in good condition. When the rain stops I'll test it out. It seems to be the same lens as the Vivitar 28-85/2.8-3.8 Auto Variable Focusing. Only the cosmetics of the front end are different. I have read that this lens was in the running to be a Series 1 model but the nod went to the 28-90/2.8-3.5. Both are very good lenses.

Russ - SVP · Mar 14, 2010

dynachrome said:
This past week I took delivery of a 28-85mm f/2.8-3.8 Kiron in Konica AR mount. It seems to be in good condition. When the rain stops I'll test it out. It seems to be the same lens as the Vivitar 28-85/2.8-3.8 Auto Variable Focusing. Only the cosmetics of the front end are different. I have read that this lens was in the running to be a Series 1 model but the nod went to the 28-90/2.8-3.5. Both are very good lenses.

Dynachrome

The Kiron 28-85 is quite good. However, in that range, I find the Vivitar Series 1 28-90 and Kiron 28-105 to be better. I've used all three of those lenses extensively over the last couple of decades. I still use my two Vivitar S-1 28-90's on a regular basis for professional shooting.

Kiron Kid

benjiboy · Mar 15, 2010

There's no doubt in my mind that these are professional quality optics, at the time they were made I worked at a big pro dealers selling them, and although more expensive in many cases than the camera manufacturers lenses and much heavier nobody else marketed anything like them, once the word got around the customers bought them in their droves.
At the moment you can buy these lenses at silly prices that bear no relation to their quality, I have the Series1 Tokina 70-210 f3.5 and am looking for the S1 28-90 2.8-3.5 Varifocal, and a truss for the hernia I'm surely going to get from lugging them about.

denmark.yuzon · Mar 16, 2010

i had the vivitar series 1 28-105mm nikon mount.. it was crap!

benjiboy · Mar 16, 2010

denmark.yuzon said:
i had the vivitar series 1 28-105mm nikon mount.. it was crap!

There's always one.

Russ - SVP · Mar 16, 2010

denmark.yuzon said:
i had the vivitar series 1 28-105mm nikon mount.. it was crap!

The Series 1 28-105 is one of the later (Cosina made) model's, and not known for it's quality. Many of the Cosina nodels are to be avoided.

Kiron Kid

dynachrome · Mar 17, 2010

I have the 28-90 in a few mounts, the older 38-85 in a few mounts and the 28-105 as well. Of these three I think the 28-90 is a good compromise when it comes to optical quality and build quality. It is still generally true that high quality fixed focal length lenses will be better than zooms when it comes to distortion, flare and edge sgarpness. I use the 28-105 mostly on a Canon F-1 with the L D focusing screen. This is the brighter version of the D (grid type) screen. The lens is slow enough that using the right screen is important. A combination screen like the L E (microprism surounding split image) will not work well with such a slow lens unless the light is very bright. I find it a little frustrating that the 28-105 will not allow very close focusing at the short end. That's one of the design features of a lens like this. I would not do flat copy work with the 28-105 and I probably wouldn't do architectural work with it either but for general picture taking and even for portraits it is capable of very decent image quality. Not all 28-105s are in good condition now so that's another factor.

The Vivitar 28-85/2.8-3.8 Auto Variable Focusing is also a very good lens if it is used properly and is in good condition. The annoying aspect of this lens is that, like other varifocals, it needs to be refocused each time it's zoomed. I have yet to test the Kiron version.

Russ - SVP · Mar 18, 2010

I actually prefer the Kiron 28-105 over the excellent Kiron 28-85.

Kiron Kid

fschifano · Mar 18, 2010

denmark.yuzon said:
i had the vivitar series 1 28-105mm nikon mount.. it was crap!

I have one too, and I agree with you. I though it was ok when I first got it. Comparing it against a few Nikkor primes that fell within the focal length range of this lens spoiled me. However, this particular lens is not among the original Series I lenses from Vivitar which are well regraded.

Russ - SVP · Mar 18, 2010

fschifano said:
I have one too, and I agree with you. I though it was ok when I first got it. Comparing it against a few Nikkor primes that fell within the focal length range of this lens spoiled me. However, this particular lens is not among the original Series I lenses from Vivitar which are well regraded.

The Series 1 model is a Cosina made lens. Nothing special. The Vivitar Series 1 28-90 and Kiron 28-105 are much better.

Kiron Kid

Russ - SVP · Mar 18, 2010

The Series 1 24-48 (Kiron made) is very nice too.

Kiron Kid

Chazzy · Mar 18, 2010

I'm getting very confused about telling the various Series 1 lenses apart, and knowing which ones are good and which ones aren't. I guess if I were considering buying one, I would just make a post in this thread and ask Kiron Kid for help!

Russ - SVP · Mar 18, 2010

Chazzy said:
I'm getting very confused about telling the various Series 1 lenses apart, and knowing which ones are good and which ones aren't. I guess if I were considering buying one, I would just make a post in this thread and ask Kiron Kid for help!

I'm glad to be of help. Ask anytime.

Kiron Kid-MrVivSeries1

benjiboy · Mar 19, 2010

Chazzy said:
I'm getting very confused about telling the various Series 1 lenses apart, and knowing which ones are good and which ones aren't. I guess if I were considering buying one, I would just make a post in this thread and ask Kiron Kid for help!

I was out shooting yesterday with my series 1 70-210 f3.5 lens and if anyone is thinking about buying one of these from an auction site , or mail order I warn you that although they're killer lenses they're also " Heavy Metal" and not the kind of lens you can hang around you're neck for hours without almost garrotting yourself, I use mine with a wrist strap and carry the camera in my hand, but they are great glass and cheap, I can't believe what a good lens this is for the £40 ($61 US) I paid for it at a local photo store with the original rubber hood and six months warranty.

Russ - SVP · Mar 19, 2010

benjiboy said:
I was out shooting yesterday with my series 1 70-210 f3.5 lens and if anyone is thinking about buying one of these from an auction site , or mail order I warn you that although they're killer lenses they're also " Heavy Metal" and not the kind of lens you can hang around you're neck for hours without almost garrotting yourself, I use mine with a wrist strap and carry the camera in my hand, but they are great glass and cheap, I can't believe what a good lens this is for the £40 ($61 US) I paid for it at a local photo store with the original rubber hood and six months warranty.

I suppose that since I grew up using these heavy metal lenses, I don't even notice their weight. But, in comparison, my more modern lenses are ferathers when compared to the old Vivitars and Kirons.

Kiron Kid

Vivitar series 1 lens opinions

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency