Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,553   Posts: 1,544,998   Online: 693
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52
  1. #11
    Marc Akemann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor area, Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,260
    Images
    4
    I'm not a real fan of zoom lenses, however, I do have the first version (67mm filter size, serial #22642xxx) 70-210mm f3.5 with a Nikon non-AI mount. It's still like new and the focus/zoom ring doesn't slide on it's own when the lens is aimed up or down. I like heavy equipment so the weight of this lens doesn't bother me. It is a very sharp lens. I use it on a Nikon F2 Photomic. According to my U.S. Postal Service scale the lens by itself (no caps, filters, etc.) weighs 2 pounds, 1.4 ounces.
    Last edited by Marc Akemann; 08-26-2009 at 02:00 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Added weight.

  2. #12
    mfophotos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    47
    Images
    10
    I had the same lens maybe 8 or 9 years ago in a Nikon mount. My only problem with it was that the zoom would creep. However, optics were great, and yeah it's heavy. Filmsprocket likes those heavy lenses, so I am going to give him a lead-lined lens case someday...
    Mark O'Brien
    Ann Arbor, MI
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/mfobrien/

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    264
    First one I had was for Canon FD Mount used on my T90 20 years ago, loved it. A few months back I got another for my Nikon system, first generation. It's heavy but for 35.00 it is great lens.

    Might want to check this site out if you have not already http://www.robertstech.com/vivitar.htm
    ___________________
    David

  4. #14
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,126
    Quote Originally Posted by BimmerJake View Post
    considering i only paid $17 i figure there's a piece to this puzzle that's missing. is this lens really a turd? if it is i'm fine with that, i wasn't expecting much for $17, and really it was an impulse buy.
    At $17 you will either use and enjoy it or it will be a good paper weight.

    I think you will enjoy it.

    If you are not happy with it, then sell it on eBay with that standard "rare", "minty", and "I do not know Jack Shyt about photography" with a starting price of $100.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    202
    While on the topic of Vivitar zooms.

    I have a Series 1 35-85 2.5 and 75-205 3.8 in OM mount, both were made by Kiron. Do anyone know anything about these lenses. What is so special about their Kiron manufacture?

  6. #16
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,273
    Images
    148
    Vivitar lenses are quite variable.

    When the US based design team began Vivitar they'd come together originally to design for NASA but then began designing consumer lenses, the first was the 600mm Catadioptic S1 lens. Presumably they were very advanced with computerised design because in a very short period of time they produced a range of S1 lenses that rivalled and equalled the major camera companies lenses in terms of optical and build quality.

    Early S1 lenses were all of outstanding quality, they worked with & oversaw the quality standards, just as Zeiss does with companies making their lenses. The real milestone S1 lenses were the 600mm. the 28mm f1.9, the 70-210 zooom, and a 35-85mm Vari-focal f2.8.

    At some point the Vivitar brand changed, they began re-branding other lenses, only their own S1 designed lenses were comparable to the top 5 camera manufacturers own, and some say the quality dropped with S1 lenses.

    Ian

  7. #17
    dances_w_clouds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Vancouver B.C. Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,233
    Images
    44
    35-85mm Vari-focal f2.8.
    Have one of those in FD mount with a 72mm filter mount. No creeping or fog. One of my fav's

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    580
    I have one that I bought with a Minolta many years ago. 67mm S/N 22902785. Extraordinary; and I don't like Zooms. Macro capability ( for a Zoom) is very good.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    133
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Kennedy View Post
    Wrote out the list.
    thanks for the clarification... i should get the sucker on friday or monday. as soon as i do i'll post the serial.

    i've actually never really used a zoom before, at the price i figured i would give it a shot
    -Jake

    Photography by the seat of my pants.

  10. #20
    cooltouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    340
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    At some point the Vivitar brand changed, they began re-branding other lenses, only their own S1 designed lenses were comparable to the top 5 camera manufacturers own, and some say the quality dropped with S1 lenses.
    Well, this quality drop hadn't occurred by the time they released their 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 S1. I had one of those in Canon mount, and shot thousands of slides with it. It was a great lens. The only thing I didn't like about it was it vignetted slightly at 28mm at wider apertures. After switching to Nikon several years later, I picked up a 28-105 f/2.8-3.8 S1 and used it for a while. This lens appeared to be every bit as good as the 28-90, but I'll admit that I didn't shoot with it nearly as much. I didn't keep it for long -- must have sold it when I went through one of my equipment downsizing moods. I hate it when that happens.

    Best,
    Michael

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin