Two old lenses

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Coresounder, Jul 17, 2007.

  1. Well, after a bit of searching for that "Jewel" I found two of them!!
    One is A Vivitar 35-105 with a constant 3.5, it's also 72mm!
    The other is a Nikon Series E 36-72 with a constant 3.5

    They are on order right now, so I haven't had chance to play yet.
    Has anyone used either of these lenses?
    I'm thinking they may be a useful manual focus for the D200.
     
  2. sound like pretty good stuff Carlton. Show us some results once you get them and have a chance.
     
  3. Besides being very cheap, I don't think they are "jewels" by any means.
     
  4. Why? Have you used both or either of these?
    I have many times found cheap to be very good.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 17, 2007
  5. Thanks, Dave
    While nothing really beats good Nikon glass, I have found that certain 3rd party lenses have a very nice appeal in it's very own way. One of the things I like to do is experiment with different and odd lenses. I have come across a few that I would match head to head with anything out there. It is also very interesting of how the color renders from lens to lens.

    I will do a review on both of the lenses....good or bad. We need more reviews
    on these golden oldies!
     
  6. I think the 35-105/3.5 was made by Kiron for Vivitar. If it's the lens I'm thinking about it is likely quite good. Kiron made a series of very fine lenses that matched the best available at the time and some are still among the best you can get. I think the Kiron 28-85/2.8-3.3 and 35-105/3.5 are among them.
     
  7. If it is made by Kiron, I will be very happy! Thanks for the info.
     
  8. Let's face it, a Hugo Boss suit is only really worth 5$ or so, so yeah cheap doesn't mean bad. But I wouldn't have any kind of hopes on those lenses.

    Hey, why not a 18-55 for 75$? Really, why not? Too expensive?
     
  9. NB23 - Do you have experience with those lenses?
     
  10. cameraguy21773- I don't think they are jewels and I wouldn't have any high hopes on those lenses. Those we're my words...
     
  11. Yes, those were your words my firend but, you didn't answer the question.
     
  12. Is there a reason why I should have tried those Two 9.99$ Super Gems?
     
  13. Carlton, some of the series E lenses, like the 36-72, were actually fantastic performers, and at the price, why not try, right?
    the Kirons were and are still (if that's what yours will be) some of the best made and highest performers and have been for 30 years....i.e. Vivitar Series 1 were made by Kiron, and they are still fantastic performers....
    I feel, as an owner of a couple hundred Nikkors and many of several other brands, that the manufacturing and materials have changed a LOT in the last few years, but NOT the image abilities....most changes were to allow more profit, not make a better image.....the 75 dollar E series 75-150 from 1980 still makes a comparable print equal to the 1000 dollar 80-200, all things being equal in testing....and my Series 1 90mm macro is sharper and higher in contrast than the Nikkor 105.....'nuff said....
     

  14. Hi Dit!

    I hear you! I do have a 135 Telesar (worth about 0.25$, though) and shot with various Vivitar1 lenses. Great performance, great construction. But as the 5$ Hugo Boss suit that sells for 2K$ in stores, those lenses just aren't Jewels. Only the Nikkor Noct and such lenses have elevated to being jewels, altough the Noct is probably worst then any lens at f8 and on.

    In the grand scheme of things, all lenses in the world are capable lenses...

    By the way, Frits gave me a Nikkor 43-86mm AI Zoom. Oh my, hello LensBaby Hello!
     
  15. And that 90 remains one of the highest resolving lenses ever manufactured... compared equal to Leica at the time. Not sure how it compares to lenses today.
     
  16. Ditto,
    Lets just keep it our own little secret :cool:
    I should have kept my fingers away from the keyboard.:confused:
    I just grabbed a couple of shots with my Vivitar 105 2.5 Macro. Its
    a Kiron. I'll post them for you in the macro section, let me know
    what you think. Thanks!
     
  17. I think that some of the classic old macros match or even exceed the sharpness and general image quality of some of the current macros -- Nikons included.

    Vivitar 100mm 2.8 / Vivitar 105mm 2.5 / Kiron 105mm 2.8 / Lester Dine 105mm 2.8 -- all the same optics from Kiron, just a superb lens.

    Vivitar 90mm 2.5 / Tokina 90mm 2.5 -- made by Tokina, just an awesome lens with incredible sharpness. Its only flaw is that it only goes to 1:2. It needs a matched macro converter but those do subtract a bit from the IQ.

    The older Photodo tests tested the Vivitar 90mm 2.5 / Tokina 90mm 2.5 and it was one of the ten sharpest lenses they've ever tested. It actually beat out the older Nikon 105mm 2.8. Though the 90mm 2.5 has an advantage in only going to just 1:2 -- I suspect that helped them engineer some extra sharpness.
     
  18. Agreed! And yes, there is something about those old lenses that I just love.

    For one thing, in 50 years (if any of us are still here) these old lenses are still going to be in fine operation while all the cheap plastic lenses are going to be piled up in the dump.
     
  19. To the best of my knowledge, the Tokina is a copy of the Vivitar which was on the market long before the Tokina. I've heard this story many different ways and would love to get a definitive answer as the the origins of these two lenses.
     
  20. I was blown away by how well-built the old macros are. The Kiron-made Vivitar 100mm 2.8 / Vivitar 105mm 2.5 Series 1 / Kiron 105mm 2.8 / Lester Dine 105mm 2.8 lenses are like tanks. I've weighed two on a postal scale without caps and they were 21.6 to 22.8 ounces (the VS1 has a rubber-coated focusing ring so that probably accounts for the variation). They're just a big hunk of metal and glass. I like the built-in metal hoods. Here's the VS1 that I sold a while ago:

    [​IMG]

    The build quality of the Vivitar 90mm 2.5 is somewhat better than the Tokina 90mm 2.5, though the Tokina is no slouch. The Vivitar seems to have a beefier barrel and weighs a few more ounces (almost 22). The 1:1 macro converter for the Vivitar is also heavier and has a tripod collar.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Old AF/AF-D/G FX zoom lenses for my D700 Lens Lust Aug 29, 2017
Now I understand all the hoopla about "old" lenses ... Lens Lust Jul 26, 2017
Old lenses on D810 or D750? Lens Lust Mar 27, 2017
Nikon PC lenses - old vs new? Lens Lust Oct 5, 2011
Anybody try new lenses on old bodies? Lens Lust Feb 6, 2011