Vivitar series 1 28 - 105mm F2.8 - a short review

I bought this lens in a 2nd hand photo shop in Belgium for about $

120. I intended to give it to my 15 year old son, who shoots with an

A - 1 in Program mode.

 

It's a push - pull zoom. You immediately recognize it, because cast

in the rubber focusing ring it says "SERIES 1" in enormous letters,

twice.

 

I went to Spain on holiday and tried it out.

 

Because the push - pull system the distance focusing marks run

obliquely and are completely useless. It looks so weird that for that

reason I almost didn't buy the lens.

 

At the 28 mm setting the lens focuses down to about half life size.

At last some true macro possibilities in a zoom! Of course, then

you're about 2 inches from the lens and you have to pay attention not

to shoot in your own shadow.

 

I tested the lens on landscape, people, flowers, buildings, etc.

 

It's very sharp at all zoom settings. The colours and contrast are

rich.

 

I photographed the sea horizon at different elevations. At 28 mm

there is some barrel distortion which could be a problem with

architecture. At other settings I couldn't notice distortion.

 

I took a lot of flower shots at closest focusing distance, about 1/2

at 28 mm, at F 16 and F 22. They look just good. A surprise is that

the perspective at 28 mm is completely different from what I'm used

to see with my normal 200 mm macro lens, which was a pleasant

surprise. Also yo have to shoot more or less in the sun's direction

to avoid being in your own shadow.

 

After a while , with close - ups, I focused roughly and then made the

image sharp by zooming a little. I never did this with my other

zooms, but it feels natural with this one.

 

When shooting into the sun (I had no shade on the lens) there were

some ghosts, but not so that it was really bothersome.

 

Mechanically the lens feels sturdy and pleasant. When zooming you

have to refocus, but that's no surprise considering the wide range.

 

This is an extremely pleasant and very good lens. I'm giving my son

my Canon FD 35 - 105 lens, and I'll continue shooting with this

one. I think this lens proves that sometimes you should risk buying

third party lenses.

Some of the Vivitar Series One lenses are exceptional, even reaching "cult classic" status. Many of the best were made by Kiron for Vivitar (who subcontracted all of their lenses). If the serial number starts with "22" it was likely made by Kiron.

I have the Vivitar 90-180 macro zoom, which is an excellent performer and has cult status. It was originally made for medical photography, but it was very expensive. It is a flat-field lens.

You are correct in your statement about it not being such a bad idea often to try the third party lenses. I believe that the third party lenses that were available in the "FD" days were probably better quality overall than most of the "newer" camera equipment of today. I had one of the early Vivitar Series-1, 70-210mm with Macro for over 20 years. Not only was it very rugged but the optics and final results were fantastic. In addition to the "natural" feeling push-pull zoom and twist focus. These felt exceptionally natural to me when doing any macro work. I also had one of the so called "cheaper" third party (I don't remember the brand) 500mm mirror that was exceptional for the price. I don't know if this varies optically with each individual piece or manufacturer. (Maybe I was just extremely lucky) But, in the past years I have owned several so called third party pieces. They were all "good values for the money."

I miss, and sometimes regret getting rid of my "A-series" Canon's and "FD" lenses to upgrade to the EOS and EF lenses. Not near as durable nor do they have the quality. I sincerely doubt that I will get the same 30 years of use from the EOS stuff as I had gotten from the "FD" equipment. As a final note: I traded the "older" but still exceptional equipment for the EF 75-300mm, IS, USM Canon. All things considered, . . . would gladly trade this 75-300 for one of the older Vivitar Series-1's that would work full function on my EOS, Elan7E!!

My .02 worth! Jim J.

Hi, Jim.

 

I've got a 500 mm mirror lens, too. It's a Tokina 500 mm F8. I could buy it for such a ridiculously low price I just couldn't resist. I thought I'd never use it but for the occasional cliché sunset, until I found out it focused right down to 5 ft. The image then is about 1/2.5 life size. A whole new macro world then opened up to me: Dragonfly's, butterflies, flowers on the edge of a crevasse, orchids in trees, hummingbirds, shy lizards,...

 

I know: the bokeh in this lens is awful, but I quickly learned to be a little selective in my backgrounds. The lens is very sharp. And it's only about 4'' long, so it fits in with other lenses in my bag when I go on nature walks.

 

Bye,

 

dirk

Hi Dirk,

 

I'm pleased to read a review on a Series1 here!

Recently I bought a Vivitar SERIES 1 too. A 35-85/2.8 to be precise.

I had a Canon FD35-105/3.5-4.5 and wasn't very pleased with it's variable diafragm and the distortion at either zoom-end bothered me.

I know these are two different lenses, with different zoomratios and comparing them would be like comparing an apple with an egg.

Nevertheless I did some tests.

 

I did some studiotests with colours and black on white crosspatterns.

To get a good result I compared the Vivitar series1 to the Canon 35-105 and the superior 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 on several focal lenghts and diafragms.

The results were amazing. I did not expect the Vivitar to be as good as the Canonzoom but it turned out to deliver much better results!

The image was much sharper and much more vivid.

At F2.8 over it's full focal range, the Vivitar's corners were not very sharp compared to the prime lenses, but that's nothing new.

There's almost no vignet visible.

The Canon zoom's pictures were much worse considering the corners.

At around F4.5 the sharpness of the Vivitar got ideal, where the Canon is still in it's blurry phase.

 

The Vivitar shows much less barrel- and cushion-shaped distortion than the Canon Zoom. At 35 and 105 it's really bothering, where the vivitar is much more pleasant and less extreme.

 

The colours are not very different. I hardly noticed any difference.

 

As you said, the lens showed some ghosts when shooting against the sun: I noticed this too. At this point, the vivitar didn't perform as well as the Canon. Put a shade on the lens and the problems is solved!

 

Anyway, very pleasing results from the SERIES1 !

Hi!

A shop very near my house is selling a new Vivitar Series 1 28-105, f2,8 I think - not sure. It?s only 129?!! Do you think it?s a good lens for that price?

Please, all the people who has this zoom or a similar one, answer me!

thanks!

Vivitar series 1 28 - 105 mm F 2.8 - that's the lens. It shows "SERIES 1" on the rubber sleeve around the barrel. I paid $ 160 for it, so the price is good.

 

Bye,

 

Dirk

I just happen to be scanning a bunch of ancient negs, shot with the 28-105...

 

While it was reasonably sharp, I got rid of it shortly after using it (same with a Tokina) because a) I didn't like the way it handled and b) it wasn't in the same league as Canon prime lenses.

 

It probably rivaled Canon's less expensive zooms, but I couldn't have used those professionally either...would have been OK for journalism but not for advertising work.