Vivitar series 1 lens opinions

[dynachrome]

Somewhere I have a Vivitar 24-70 Series 1 in Minolta MD mount. It needs some work or I would have tested already. Has anyone here used that lens?

 

[Russ - SVP]

Dynachrome

All of the Series 1 24-70's, were made by Cosina. Sadly, when Cosina began maunufacturing Viv S-1 lenses , the quality usually suffered. No fault of Cosina. They make it to the designers price point, and are very capable of making fine, well made lenses. In this case, it's a decent lens, nothing special, nothing crappy. The Cosina made Viv S-1 200mm f/3.5AF (also made by Komine) lens is very good, and even beats out the legendary Nikon 180mm f/2.8 lens. What kind of work does it need? You may actually be quite pleased with it's performance.

Kiron Kid

 

[benjiboy]

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

I guess I've been spoiled by the fact that most of my lenses for 35mm format are the new type Canon FD ones that have plastic barrels, and are much lighter.

 

[Russ - SVP]

I guess I've been spoiled by the fact that most of my lenses for 35mm format are the new type Canon FD ones that have plastic barrels, and are much lighter.

Yes, but they can't take the abuse, wear and tear of the older models...

Kiron Kid

 

[Pumal]

Not so; many, many years of use, abuse, accidents, etc.

 

[elekm]

I sort of got the impression that some of the later products weren't as well made and that the brand got diluted by slapping "Series 1" on point and shoot cameras and other decidedly low-level gear.

 

[Russ - SVP]

I sort of got the impression that some of the later products weren't as well made and that the brand got diluted by slapping "Series 1" on point and shoot cameras and other decidedly low-level gear.

Sadly, there is some truth to that statement.

Kiron Kid

 

[benjiboy]

Yes, but they can't take the abuse, wear and tear of the older models...

Kiron Kid

I'm not sure about that, to say the barrels are plastic is an over simplification they are a specially developed plastic that Canon said at the time they were convinced was a better material and about half the weight of the metal barrels and it enabled them to embed the lens elements in the molten plastic to make them less subject to shock damage, and Teflon coat the focusing helicoids to make them very smooth. Most of my lenses with the exception of two are the new type, and after around twenty years regular use are still as good as the day I bought them, I know that what you say is the accepted wisdom but it's not borne out by my experience, or anyone I know who uses them.

 

[Steve Smith]

Plastic is just a single term which can be used to describe a variety of materials which have a variety of properties - some of which are suited to mass production of precision pieces and some are not.

It's a bit like saying that a hammer is only any good if it's made out of metal - but which metal? Steel, lead, copper, mercury?

I agree with Benjiboy's comment from Canon that there are some engineering plastics that can be a better choice for some precision parts than machined metal.


Steve.

 

[dynachrome]

Kiron Kid, you state that

"The Cosina made Viv S-1 200mm f/3.5AF (also made by Komine) lens is very good, and even beats out the legendary Nikon 180mm f/2.8 lens"

I just looked at my 200/3 Vivitar Series 1 in Konica AR mount. It has the Komine 28XXX... serial number. What I've read is that the 200/3.5 AF has the same optical design as the 200/3 but has a beam splitter built in and that this reduces the amount of light striking the film. Did Komine supply the lens elements to Cosina for this lens?

I find the close focusing of the 200/3 very handy in situations where I can't get any closer to the subject.

 

[fschifano]

Now you've piqued my interest. Why would a beam splitter be incorporated into a lens? What purpose would it serve?
Early three strip Technicolor cameras had beam splitters in the body of the camera. A set of three color separation negatives were exposed simultaneously on these cameras, and they all needed to be in perfect register. Canon's Pellix along with a couple of later models had a beam splitter in the body in place of a moving mirror so it would work with an ultra fast (for the time) motor drive (reference here). As a plus, it could be used with non retrofocus wide angle lenses where clearance would be a problem, without flipping the mirror up and blacking out the viewfinder. Nikon made a few specialty cameras using the same technology too, and for pretty much the same reasons. The drawback was a dim viewfinder and reduced light transmission to the film plane. But a beam splitter inside a lens designed to cast a single image? Doesn't make sense.

 

[Russ - SVP]

Kiron Kid, you state that

"The Cosina made Viv S-1 200mm f/3.5AF (also made by Komine) lens is very good, and even beats out the legendary Nikon 180mm f/2.8 lens"

I just looked at my 200/3 Vivitar Series 1 in Konica AR mount. It has the Komine 28XXX... serial number. What I've read is that the 200/3.5 AF has the same optical design as the 200/3 but has a beam splitter built in and that this reduces the amount of light striking the film. Did Komine supply the lens elements to Cosina for this lens?

I find the close focusing of the 200/3 very handy in situations where I can't get any closer to the subject.

Dynachrome

You are correct. The Vivitar S-1 200mm f/3 and Vivitar S-1 200mm f/3.5AF lenses are very similar. Besides adding the auto-focus and beam splitter, they altered the optical design just a bit. For whatever reason, the Viv S-1 200mm f/3.5AF, seems to outperform the manual focus version by a bit. As you very well know, Cosina (Mr. Kobayashi) constructs their lenses to their designers specs. They are very capable of making junk, or, high quality lenses. They make them to the price point specified.

No, Komine, did not supply the glass for the Cosina made versions. But, this is one of those instances where the Cosina made versions, are every bit as good as the Komine versions.

Kiron Kid

 

[Focus No. 9]

This is all a very interesting read. I'm kinda new to this. I just a want a lens that works reasonably well I could care less if it was a vivitar or ???.
However, this is what I understood: that there is a list of serial number ranges that indicate manufacturerer of early vivitar lens. Vivitar introduced a newly designed lens as the "Vivitar Series 1" and that particular model is often confused with the "early" lenses. The Vivitar people built upon the sucess of the early lenses and the new nomclamenture was on the box and the lens and pricey. And with most sheeple the masses embraced the "new tech" and leaving the "old reliables". I somehow got into my head that the new Series 1 lenses were inferior and not to confuse the two. Most of this was communicated to me by a serious hobbyist selling his collection of cameras. So I have been avoiding the clearly marked SERIES 1 lenses. KK stated the first three "sets of serial #'s" were very good. My resource said to watch for the "second" set in the series of "old reliables" as well.
But from the other remarks above a clearly marked SERIES 1 for sale at a resonable "used" price should be seriously considered for purchase. As of now I'm searching for a replacement of my Sears 135/80-200 1:4 (M42) that came with my recent Fujicon ST605n purchase.

I have a Vivitar 35~70 1:3.5 (PK) No.28108556 ~~any idea who made this and where is fits within the list rank?

 

[Russ - SVP]

This is all a very interesting read. I'm kinda new to this. I just a want a lens that works reasonably well I could care less if it was a vivitar or ???.
However, this is what I understood: that there is a list of serial number ranges that indicate manufacturerer of early vivitar lens. Vivitar introduced a newly designed lens as the "Vivitar Series 1" and that particular model is often confused with the "early" lenses. The Vivitar people built upon the sucess of the early lenses and the new nomclamenture was on the box and the lens and pricey. And with most sheeple the masses embraced the "new tech" and leaving the "old reliables". I somehow got into my head that the new Series 1 lenses were inferior and not to confuse the two. Most of this was communicated to me by a serious hobbyist selling his collection of cameras. So I have been avoiding the clearly marked SERIES 1 lenses. KK stated the first three "sets of serial #'s" were very good. My resource said to watch for the "second" set in the series of "old reliables" as well.
But from the other remarks above a clearly marked SERIES 1 for sale at a resonable "used" price should be seriously considered for purchase. As of now I'm searching for a replacement of my Sears 135/80-200 1:4 (M42) that came with my recent Fujicon ST605n purchase.

I have a Vivitar 35~70 1:3.5 (PK) No.28108556 ~~any idea who made this and where is fits within the list rank?

Your Vivitar 35-70, was made by Komine, for Vivitar. It's a decent lens. Not great, but not a dog. You'll most likely be pleased with it's results. As for Series 1 lenses, many or most of the early model's made by Komine, Kiron (Kino Precision Industries) and Tokina, are VERY good. later, when they went to Cosina, Samyang, etc, for their construction, the Vivitar lenses usually suffered in image and build quality. However, there are exceptions to that rule. If you see a Series 1 lens that you are interested in, drop me a line, and I'll give you the scoop on it.

As for that Vivitar production (Gandy) list floating around the Internet, it is somewhat correct. But, there are missing numbers and manufacturer's not listed on it . I just haven't gotten around to correcting and completing it yet.

Kiron Kid

 

[Zuikopath]

I have a second edition 70-210 S1 zoom (Tokina) and the 28-90 S1 (Komine) and I love them both...though they are on the heavy side.

 

[Russ - SVP]

I have a second edition 70-210 S1 zoom (Tokina) and the 28-90 S1 (Komine) and I love them both...though they are on the heavy side.

I guess, since I've used those lenses since their introduction, I don't find them heavy at all. But they are heavier than the modern plastic, polycarbonate models.

Kiron Kid

 

[Zuikopath]

Yes - just to clarify - I don't consider them TOO heavy.

I've had my 70-210 for over 15 years and use it often.

 

[Focus No. 9]

I revisted the Camerquest article...and now I'm confused again. (I've been looking for the Kiron lens (second edition lenses) Just when did Vivitar use the Series 1 nonclemture on the lens? i.e. a lens may read Vivitar 35-70mm whereas another may read Vivitar Series 1 35-70mm.
The article is not clear on this and makes the argument that all vivtar lenses are Series 1. Some are marked as such and some are not. Or would a salesman shows a customer a Vivitar 35-70 and then pulls out the Vivitar Series 1 and snap your hooked.

since I can't seem to add links to replies if your interested paste the following in your browser.
this ad from 1984 shows Series 1 : jfcampbell.us/photo/vivitar28-90.htm. And there is an ad dated 2009 for Series 1.
here is an ad of a vivitar lens that I did not know existed..no mention of Series 1 that I can see. : flickr.com/photos/nesster/3771947110/

 

[Russ - SVP]

I revisted the Camerquest article...and now I'm confused again. (I've been looking for the Kiron lens (second edition lenses) Just when did Vivitar use the Series 1 nonclemture on the lens? i.e. a lens may read Vivitar 35-70mm whereas another may read Vivitar Series 1 35-70mm.
The article is not clear on this and makes the argument that all vivtar lenses are Series 1. Some are marked as such and some are not. Or would a salesman shows a customer a Vivitar 35-70 and then pulls out the Vivitar Series 1 and snap your hooked.

since I can't seem to add links to replies if your interested paste the following in your browser.
this ad from 1984 shows Series 1 : jfcampbell.us/photo/vivitar28-90.htm. And there is an ad dated 2009 for Series 1.
here is an ad of a vivitar lens that I did not know existed..no mention of Series 1 that I can see. : flickr.com/photos/nesster/3771947110/

Focus9

The Vivitar series 1 lenses, are clearly labeled with the "Series 1" label. There are some that are the same focal length, but do not share the same aperture or "Series 1 designation. The Series 1 designs differ from non-Series 1 designs. Tell me about what focal length you are looking for, and I'll steer you in the right direction, and, or choose the proper Series 1 lens for you.

Kiron Kid

 

[dynachrome]

Vivitar Series 1

Vivitar made three series of lenses (none of them called Series 1) which had interchanngeable mount adapters. The first set had the T mount system which was developed by Tasei (later Tamron). These were pre-set lenses. They were easy to make because they had no auto diaphragm. The second set was called T4. The T4 system worked with many systems but only if the mount required a single pin. You could buy a 135mm f/2.8 T4 lens and use it with a Canon FT QL and also with a Nikkormat if you bought both adapters. As far as I know all of the T4 lenses were made by Tokina. As more camera manufacturers made cameras with more than one pin in the mount, the T4 system grew limited. Some systems for which T4 adapters were not made include Konica Autoreflex (AR), Olympus OM, Pentax K, Yashica/Contax, Nikon AI/AIS and Canon FD. The later TX system had mount adapters for all of these. The TX adapter for Nikon AI lenses is rare. I don't think I have ever seen one of them but I have seen pictures of them on eBay.

The original T system included a wide variety of lenses. The T4 system went from 21mm to 400mm and included a limited number of zooms. I have most of the T4 lenses. The ones I'm missing are the 400mm f/5.6 and the 55-135 zoom. There may have also been a slower T4 400. TX lenses went from 24mm to 400mm and included more zooms. These were either all or mostly made by Tokina. The only TX lens I seem to be missing is the 400/6.3. As I must have mentioned earlier, there were many Vivitar lenses which were not Series 1 models but which were also very good. There is an oddball 55mm f/1.2 lens which was made for Vivitar by Tomioka (later taken over by Yashica) and which, in overseas markets, was marked Series 1. At least once I saw a TX lens marked Tokina raher than Vivitar. It was probably originally sold outside of the U.S. Past a certain point you shouldn't put too much stock in what other people (including me) say about a particular lens. If you try the lens and like it then it works for you.

 

[Russ - SVP]

Vivitar made three series of lenses (none of them called Series 1) which had interchanngeable mount adapters. The first set had the T mount system which was developed by Tasei (later Tamron). These were pre-set lenses. They were easy to make because they had no auto diaphragm. The second set was called T4. The T4 system worked with many systems but only if the mount required a single pin. You could buy a 135mm f/2.8 T4 lens and use it with a Canon FT QL and also with a Nikkormat if you bought both adapters. As far as I know all of the T4 lenses were made by Tokina. As more camera manufacturers made cameras with more than one pin in the mount, the T4 system grew limited. Some systems for which T4 adapters were not made include Konica Autoreflex (AR), Olympus OM, Pentax K, Yashica/Contax, Nikon AI/AIS and Canon FD. The later TX system had mount adapters for all of these. The TX adapter for Nikon AI lenses is rare. I don't think I have ever seen one of them but I have seen pictures of them on eBay.

The original T system included a wide variety of lenses. The T4 system went from 21mm to 400mm and included a limited number of zooms. I have most of the T4 lenses. The ones I'm missing are the 400mm f/5.6 and the 55-135 zoom. There may have also been a slower T4 400. TX lenses went from 24mm to 400mm and included more zooms. These were either all or mostly made by Tokina. The only TX lens I seem to be missing is the 400/6.3. As I must have mentioned earlier, there were many Vivitar lenses which were not Series 1 models but which were also very good. There is an oddball 55mm f/1.2 lens which was made for Vivitar by Tomioka (later taken over by Yashica) and which, in overseas markets, was marked Series 1. At least once I saw a TX lens marked Tokina raher than Vivitar. It was probably originally sold outside of the U.S. Past a certain point you shouldn't put too much stock in what other people (including me) say about a particular lens. If you try the lens and like it then it works for you.

This is becoming much more complicated than need be. Yes, there are some very good non-Series 1 lenses designed by Vivitar. But, as I said before, the early Series 1 lenses, ROCK! And meet or exceed OEM lenses (as do many Kiron's). I don't have the time to go into the whole Vivitar history. PLEASE, just tell me what focal length you are looking for, and I'm more than happy to hook you up with a Vivitar Series 1 or Kiron lens that you will be very happy and satisfied with. And if you come across a non-Series 1 Vivitar that you are interested in, I'll gladly give you the history and the lineage of it. Many of the non-Series 1 lenses are very capable performers.

Kiron Kid

 

[Focus No. 9]

Focus9

The Vivitar series 1 lenses, are clearly labeled with the "Series 1" label. There are some that are the same focal length, but do not share the same aperture or "Series 1 designation. The Series 1 designs differ from non-Series 1 designs. Tell me about what focal length you are looking for, and I'll steer you in the right direction, and, or choose the proper Series 1 lens for you.

Kiron Kid

Thanks KK..that answer solves the riddle. I'm now intrigued with the TX lenses. The Vivitar that I have came with a used Ricoh XR2s along with a Promaster 28mm and a Quantaray 85-210. I purchased the set to expand my kmount lenses to fit my Pentax P3n. The Ricoh purchase started my CBA/LBA. Why? because the lady who sold me the Ricoh pulled out a SIGMA SA-1 with a Sigma 35-70 2.8 for $10 and I said yes. And I've been saying yes ever since! I have most ranges covered except the mega telephotos. Thank you again and I will keep you in mind should I decide I can't create without a 24 or 35.

 

[ulysses]

Any thoughts on the Series 1 19-35AF? I just got one cheap enough that I won't mind if it's only okay. I have two 28-105 series 1s (one in Nikon and one in Minolta MD) both with serial #s starting with 09. The nikon mount one came attached to an F2A that was what I really wanted, and I haven't shot anything with it yet. I've used the MD mount a bit on an X-700 and it's not horrible aside from some barrel distortion at the wide end. I have primes for when I really want the image, but the zooms are nice for convenience. It's surprising how often the technical merits of the image (sharpness, contrast, distortion) are invisible if the picture says something. There are times when "look how perfect this image is" is exactly what I want to say, though. It's a matter of choosing the right tool for the job.

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]

Any thoughts on the Series 1 19-35AF? I just got one cheap enough that I won't mind if it's only okay. I have two 28-105 series 1s (one in Nikon and one in Minolta MD) both with serial #s starting with 09. The nikon mount one came attached to an F2A that was what I really wanted, and I haven't shot anything with it yet. I've used the MD mount a bit on an X-700 and it's not horrible aside from some barrel distortion at the wide end. I have primes for when I really want the image, but the zooms are nice for convenience. It's surprising how often the technical merits of the image (sharpness, contrast, distortion) are invisible if the picture says something. There are times when "look how perfect this image is" is exactly what I want to say, though. It's a matter of choosing the right tool for the job.

Ulysses

The 13-35AF is decent for the money. There are many wide angle zooms that are considerably better. But they'll cost you a bit more. For the price tag, your 19-35 is alright. How do you like your Cosina made Series 1 28-105's?

Kiron Kid

 

[ulysses]

Ulysses

The 13-35AF is decent for the money. There are many wide angle zooms that are considerably better. But they'll cost you a bit more. For the price tag, your 19-35 is alright. How do you like your Cosina made Series 1 28-105's?

Kiron Kid

KK: I'll try to shoot a few things with the 28-105 S1 this afternoon and maybe post the results. I haven't used the MD mount one in a while, and I haven't used the NAI at all yet, so I'll give that one a try. Thanks for the input on the 19-35AF. That's about what I thought and I should be happy enough with it. Any idea who makes them for Vivitar? Cosina?