#Are vivitar lens filters good series#
I saw the 35 1.9 mentioned earlier, people forget that wasn't a Series 1.Įdit: I'm interested in what people think of the 28-105 Viv/Kiron.
#Are vivitar lens filters good manual#
I have a 100-200 Viv/komine which is outstanding, the 400/5.6 is the best manual long lens I have used. In fact, IMO almost everything Komine made for Vivitar could have been Series 1. I also think the Komine 2 and 2.8 Close Focus lenses could have been Series 1, they're excellent. It's a shame because the copy I have looks brand new. The only lens I have labeled Series 1 that isn't very good or fun to use is the 70-210 2.8-4 Cosina version. But even that lens, while unremarkable at the desired 2.8 aperture, isn't a bad lens, I've seen some amazing output from that one. I guess if you paid a ton for a 35-85 new back in the day and were disappointed, you might disagree.
As for the dogs of the bunch, I don't know there really were any bad lenses in the original lineup. I have several series 1 lenses now, and agree with almost all of what was said before.
I wish I could produce that kind of art with the Series 1s. Kenetik wrote: Beautiful shots as always, Woodrim. I will offer pictures from the three lenses, all at wide open. I may even be tempted to purchase the 3rd version, Komine 70-210 zoom. Should I stumble upon any of the other S1 primes at good prices, I won't hesitate to buy. I rate the lens very good with sharpness and bokeh, has close minimum focus, and like the others, it is built very well. Granted, much of the photography that I do - for instance, sea birds - requires the longer focal length. The 200mm has been my most used of the three lenses and the lens that has produced the largest number of favorite shots. It was revealing just how much difference was made by the camera. With the change of sensor, suddenly wide open pictures were crisp in any lighting. When I started using the NEX-5N there was a remarkable difference even more so than with the 135mm. I should mention that this was all with my older A200. I found that I could only get acceptable wide open results in subdued lighting. With that practice came much better results, including less CA, but the wide open performance was still lacking. I had a hard time hitting the focus perfectly until I had plenty of practice. I was initially struck by the blue fringing and I was equally disappointed with the wide open performance. Focusing is quite close for a lens of this focal length, which makes it very useful for flowers and butterflies. The 2.3/135 is also very sharp from wide open, although you better have good focusing skills with such a narrow depth of field. Whether shooting close or far, the lens performs wonderfully. I do appreciate its standard macro mode and use it for close up photography. I rarely use it with the 1:1 optical adapter, probably because I rarely do macro photography. It seems insanely sharp and is quite so even at f/2.5. The 2.5/90 will get my vote for the best of the three I have. I also find it easily corrected, so it became a non issue with me, especially given the overall image quality of the lenses. In many cases I no longer experience CA and when I do, it is much less apparent than with the older sensor of my Sony A200. The 135mm and 200mm do suffer from it, but I found a remarkable difference when I upgraded my camera to the NEX-5N. I only see minimal CA from the 90mm and only in the extremes where it would be expected. I have them both.Ī few words about the blue/purple fringing. While the 2/28 and 2.8/28 Close Focus lenses by Komine are not labeled as Series 1, I think they easily could have been. Since I do not have a single manual zoom in my collection of lenses, I can only comment on the primes, but not likely to say anything I have not said before. Woodrim wrote: Anyone that has paid attention would know that I am a fan of Series 1 lenses, although I do not have as many as others here.
0 kommentar(er)
