Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 23, 2006, 6:39 PM   #11
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
Roy-

The serial number on the Vivitar 70-210mm F 2.8-F 4.0push pull lens is 9550129. I cannot find any A designation on the lens itself nor can I determine if the lens was made by somebody other than Vivitar. The lens can also be used as a Macro lens as well, that is the feature that drew to the lens.

Here is another photo sample from the Vivitar 70-210mm lens that I just took.

MT/Sarah
wow, that's one i read to avoid. cosina made that one. just think what the good ones produce. you can ck models at this page.
http://www.cameraquest.com/VivLensManuf.htm
the better manufacturers were #s 6,22,28,37. 'hogrider' knows about the vivitars a lot more than i do..

justin, i doubt you use the 600mm. it's a PITA especially as slow as it is..

roy
sorry, i don't know where 600mm came from. i looked on ebay for the tamron but could not fing it. gotta link??
  Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 6:54 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Justinian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 249
Default

OK, I know that some photographers frown upon the use of teleconverters, but I have seen some very sharp results with them. Since I have the Pentax 50-200mm, (which in digital terms translates into 200-300mm, if I am not mistaken), could I not use a 1.4x or even 2x teleconverter with this lens and get increased focal range that way? Then I won't have to buy the Pentax 80-320mm or any other telephoto zoom. My question is: how much extra focal range will a 1.4x and 2.0x tc give me on the 50-200mm and on the 80-320mm? In general, what do you think of tc's to increase focal range? Or is it just better to buy a 300mm prime and add a tc? eBay has this one for sale right now: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...%3AIT&rd=1


Thank you very much!

J...
Justinian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 7:12 PM   #13
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

an auto focus converter will cost you over 100usd.. 99% of them are crap.
the lens you linked to is for a 6x7 format lens. it can be used with an adapter that will cost you 100-160usd.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 7:19 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Justinian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 249
Default

Oy vey! I am showing my ignorance again. Do you think the Tamron 1.4x AF TC is crap?????
OK, what about this lens. I placed a bid on it and was outbid, but maybe I should go for it, since it was a $50 Buy it Now deal:
http://cgi.ebay.com/SIGMA-manual-Zoo...QQcmdZViewItem
I don't see how you can go wrong with a lens this cheap.
Justinian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 7:54 PM   #15
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

it's an apo lens. it's probably decent enough. no more buy it now tho, someone bid on it. you might email the seller and ask tho.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 8:23 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Roy-

Thanks for all the info on the Vivitar lens. Perhaps it was made by Cosina. It really does not matter to me. I am pleased with the photos and it was a bargain.

As I understand it, that serial numbering system went out of use in 1990, some 16 years ago. From your airshow thread comments, I get the drift that you flew airplanes as well at sometime. Could that be true, Roy?

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 9:08 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Ira & Mike-

I read that the Pentax FA 80-320mm get soft betweem roughly 250 and 300mm. I don't own the lens so I cannot verify this statement. What do you think?

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 9:49 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

Sarah, I have only seen prints from 35mm film using the 80-320mm, they were very sharp at the 320mm end. I realize that it may lack the crispness of the Vivitar or an FA* 300mm but it is better than the criticism would suggest. Since Justinian already has the excellent DA 50-200mm lens he needs more reach. Here is a sample, shot at 300mm,from my 100-300mm (real cheapie) f4.7-5.8 (cost me $65Cdn in like new condition with a UV filter and a rubber lens hood). Check here http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=80for more info onmy 100-300mm



I believe the 80-320 is at least as sharp as this.

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 10:05 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

Justinian wrote:
Quote:
Oy vey! I am showing my ignorance again. Do you think the Tamron 1.4x AF TC is crap?????
The newer Tamron 1.4x AF TC (Tamron af14p700) is very nice and produces very exceptional results with a sharp high contrast lens.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2006, 11:50 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Justinian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 249
Default

Has anyone had experience with the Super Takumar 300mm F/4?
Justinian is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:47 AM.