Vivitar 28-105 f2.8-3.8 - multiple versions?

[brian_prestemon]

I posted this on the Texas Photo Forum as well but I thought I'd see if a

likely wider audience can provide further input...

 

I recently picked up an inexpensive, but in pristine condition, Vivitar Series

1 manual focus 28-105 f2.8-3.8 macro zoom lens.

 

I'd always heard about the Vivitar Series 1 line actually being pretty good so

I thought I'd take the opportunity to try out an example. Plus this is a pretty

bright lens compared to equivalent zooms in other brands.

 

My confusion is that I'm hearing that there were several versions of this

Vivitar lens all with the same identical zoom focal length. There were

evidently two with a 67mm filter size and one with a 72mm filter size. I've

further heard that one of the 67mm ones is by far the best and the other two

are just fair. I've got the 72mm version and based on serial number prefix

information that a Texas Photo Forum member provide, it turns out my lens was

probably manufactured by Cosina.

 

I know that Vivitar is mainly just a marketing company that spec'd lenses but

didn't manufacture them for themselves. And from what I'm told by some Texas

Photo Forum people is that the Cosina ones aren't some of the better lenses.

 

Anyway, can anyone shed some additional light on this issue? Evidently Vivitar

really make three versions of this same focal lenght zoom lens. Does anyone

what order did they make them (years of manufacture)and how they compare? Who

made the three different ones? Bottom line, is the lens I bought a real find

or just a mediocre off-brand lens?

 

Certainly I will try it out and see for myself what kind of results I get but I

still would appreciate any and all insight you may have to offer.

 

Thanks,

 

Brian

[mfophotos]

The old Series 1 lenses that were really good were made by Kiron. If you were to pick up a lens with the Kiron name on it, you'll be happy with it. The later Series 1 lenses are mostly made by Cosina as you indicated, and aren't necessarily bad, just not as good as the early ones.

 

I still regret selling my Kiron 70-200.

[User_502260]

There were two differet 28-105mm manual focus sold under the Vivitar name. The 28-105mm f/2.8-3.8 Series 1 lens was made by Cosina. This is a very decent lens. My main complaint about it is that it does not allow very close focusing at the short end. If you can focus the lens where the light isn't very good you will see that it is sharp even wide open or close up. I have two of these in Canon FD mount. There was also a 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5. This lens has 77 as the first two digits of its serial number. I don't know who made this lens because the number system which is shown on the Cameraquest website was probably no longer in use by the time it was made. If I had to guess I would say it was probably also made by Cosina but at a later time and to a lower standard.

 

One of the early Vivitar Series 1 zooms was the 35-85mm f/2.8. This was a varifocal lens and not a zoom. Each time you zoomed with the 1 touch ring you had to refocus. I have one of these in M42 mount and another in Minolta MC mount. It is still a good lens if it is in good condition but it is quite heavy. This lens was made by Kino Precision and has 22 as its first two serial numbers. It was replaced by the 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5 Series 1. This lens was made by Komine and has 28 as its first two serial numbers. It is narrower and lighter than the earlier 35-85 but still heavy and very well made. Between the 35-85, 28-90 and 28-105 Series 1 lenses, the 28-90 is my favorite.

 

There was also a 28-85mm f/2.8-3.8 Variable Focusing Vivitar which was not a Series 1 lens. It is a varifocal like the earlier 35-85mm f/2.8 Series 1 and it was rumored to have been in competition with the 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 Komine lens to be the Series 1 model. If I remember correctly this lens was made by Kino Precision. I have one in Pentax K mount but I can't find it just now. It is also a very nice lens if you don't mind the varifocal feature.

[User_502260]

Not all of the best Series 1 lenses were made by Kino. The famous 90mm f/2.5 Series 1 Macro was made by Tokina. It may be the sharpest Series 1 lens made and is one of the sharpest general purpose lenses ever made. I have one of these in Canon FD mount with the matching 1:1 adapter. Some years later there was a Vivitar 105/2.8 Series 1 lens which was in fact made by Kino and which was also sold as a 100/2.8 Kiron. A friend has a few of these and I will eventually get one from him in Pentax K mount.

[tommyinca]

If you want to get a Kiron 28-105mm just go for one with a Kiron label. Kiron made a 28-105mm f3.2-4.5 (67mm filter). You should be able to get one for less then $50. It is as good as any 28-105 could be. Personally, I would go for the Kiron 28-85 f2.8-3.8, it is ligher, faster and sharper.

[russ_butner___portland__or]

If you want a manual 28-105, go with the superb Kiron 28-105. The Series 1 model was made by Cosina, and the older non-Series 1 version was made by Kobori.

 

Russ (Kiron Kid)

[russ_butner___portland__or]

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 had a hand in it) and 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 in time may become my favorite.

 

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.

 

If you have anymore questions about the Vivitar or Kiron lenses, or want more detailed information on a particular lens, please don't hesitate to ask. Are you aware of the Viv S-1 28-90 or the Kiron 28-85, Kiron 28-105 and the phenomenal Kiron 105 macro lens? As for Kiron glass, well that's another discussion.........

 

 

 

Kiron Kid

[liew_yoon_nyean]

<p>I own a 28-105mm with a filter size of 67mm, serial number starting 99. I wonder who made this. I really like this lens, I shoot very sharp with this with my Pentax K200D. Its versatile cos I can even do close focusing whenever I needed. It may not be a 1.1 marco but its good enough for my needs. This lens is always in my bag where ever I go.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>I can shed some light. There were <em>at least</em> two Vivitar S1 28-105/2.8-3.8 manual focus lenses. I've owned one version that 'm pretty sure was Cosina, in Minolta MD mount, that I gave to Jeremy Richter in a gear giveaway on the classic cameras board. It has a problem focusing and he wasn't able to fix it, because the repair manual he found was for a different version of the lens. That lens had a cheap-ish feel to it and had a medium gray, softish rubber grip that is characteristic of later, not really that well made Cosina Vivitars.</p>

<p>There is another version of this lens on my F3 right now, that I acquired recently for not much money on Ebay (despite perfect condition and inclusion of an F-C mount adapter). It's got a 67mm thread and very close focus. The grip is a darker gray and a harder material - more like a stiff plastic than a rubber. The construction is metal and if it weren't for the grip, I would have mistaken it for a Kiron for a couple minutes (until realizing it's not heavy enough for Kiron).</p>

<p>Image quality on the metal one is... well, I don't have really good comparisons here between this lens and the S1 28-90, because I have a perfectly working 28-90 in MD mount and two somewhat broken ones in Nikon, and I've shot the MD one quite a bit and got really nice results from it, all on various kinds of film, but I haven't got as much experience with this 28-105. I've shot a roll of B&W film and messed around some on my D7000.</p>

<p>So, taking this all with a grain of salt, here is a mini-review of the 28-105, better Cosina metal version:</p>

<p>The 28-105 is pretty sharp. It focuses very close (I need to feel in front of the lens to not bump things if I'm handholding). There is CA and a veiling flare or haze noticeable at large apertures. My initial reaction on seeing the photos is that it's not as contrasty as I'd hope, and I need to adjust levels quite a bit to cover a satisfying amount of the histogram - but I haven't shot in enough lighting conditions to say that with confidence, so take that last part with two or three grains of salt! The bokeh is pretty good, with a nice overall look but the bright spots get a bit geometric when the aperture blades come into play, and I've got a couple of shots that show a "ring" effect but most don't. Overall, I think it's an excellent lens on a manual focus film camera, and on digital... well, look, it was under $40 and it has its uses so I'm not complaining.</p>

<p>Samples here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/21616771@N04/sets/72157627527437334/</p>

[andylynn]

<p>I'm revising what I wrote before. On closer inspection I found an odd, mostly uniform film of... something... on the rear element, that I hadn't noticed before. After cleaning, sharpness and contrast improved and CA's reduced. Now this is an excellent lens, right up there with the 28-90, and it's going to be my most used manual focus lens.</p>