Info on Vivitar/Cosina/Soligor 70-210f2.8-4 needed

[meanstreak]

JimC wrote:

maxxum7d should do a comparison with the Minolta 80-200mm f/2.8 for us to see what 10-15 times the cost the Vivitar does for you. :-)

I noticed the posts about getting both of them in this thread:

maxxum7d wrote:

maxxum7d wrote:

Yeah, it's nice to have great glass compared to good or mediocre if you can part with the cash, but I just can't afford "G" quality. I will say that I notice a difference in my higher quality middle of the road stuff compared to what some consider junk, but some of the inexpensive stuff does quite well if used under the right circumstances. For me it's just a hobby and I have higher priorites for my cash. As it is I have spent too much money on equipment but I should be good forawhile.

[maxxum7d]

I just got the vivitar, its still in the UPS box. I will compare it with my 800 dollar White G lens asap!!!!!

JimC wrote:

maxxum7d should do a comparison with the Minolta 80-200mm f/2.8 for us to see what a lens that usually runs 10+ times the cost of the Vivitar does for you. :-)

I noticed the posts about getting both of them in this thread:

maxxum7d wrote:

maxxum7d wrote:

[JimC]

maxxum7d wrote:

I just got the vivitar, its still in the UPS box. I will compare it with my 800 dollar White G lens asap!!!!!

I think I know which one is going to win that comparison. :-)

The Minolta should beat it in most categories (color, contrast, flare resistance, AF speed, etc.).

I've got a feeling that center sharpness won't be too bad with the Vivitar, though. For $79, as little as I'd likely use one, what the heck. Mine should be here tomorrow according to UPS tracking. But, I don't know when I'll get a chance to try it.

[maxxum7d]

Ok, I didn't even need to pick up my 80-200 to compare it against this junk from Vivitar. IQ will be tested when I get home. To me, it is important that a lens feels good and makes me confidant that physical build will not stop me from taking a good shot. The Vivitar fails miserably. Maybe I am so used to minolta lenses that I have my standards somewhat high now, but even when I try really hard to remain unbiased, I feel cheated by Vivitar.

So, here is a short/quick review on the build of 70-210 f/2.8-4:

1. Size: smaller and lighter than the beercan. Everything is plastic and cheap rubber. 62mm filter. Don't expect it to last 20 years though.

2. Features: A switch (focus-limit), push and pull zoom, rotating front element (goodbye polarizer).

3. AF speed: Horrible. Even my 100mm f/2.8 macro focuses faster with and without the limit switch. Sometimes this lens hunts all the way and doesn't focus as well (and fast) my 80-200. I also have the 75-300 CC lens which I haven't used in a long time but I remember focusing faster than this vivitar junk. (edit: playing with the limit switch improves focusing)

Some shots I took minutes ago are here: http://s97.photobucket.com/albums/l202/maxxum_7d/



JimC wrote:

maxxum7d wrote:

I think I know which one is going to win that comparison. :-)

The Minolta should beat it in most categories (color, contrast, flare resistance, AF speed, etc.).

I've got a feeling that center sharpness won't be too bad with the Vivitar, though. For $79, as little as I'd likely use one, what the heck. Mine should be here tomorrow according to UPS tracking. But, I don't know when I'll get a chance to try it.

[JimC]

I didn' t expect that the build quality would be very good with a $79 lens.

Most reports you see of the cheaper Vivitar/Phoenix/Cosina lenses indicate that they are relatively "flimsy" (front elements wobbling, etc.). :-)

I'm not worried about that part. I wouldn't use one very often anyway (this lens is likely to get very little use). I'm just thinking that it might come in handy every once in a great while (for example, plays, dance recitals, or concerts where I'm too far away for my 100mm f/2 or 135mm f/2.8 ).

Take some photos with your 80-200mm f/2.8 at the same time as you take some from the Vivitar if you get a chance (trying both wide open and stopped down at various focal lengths). All else aside (build quality, AF speed, etc.), I'd be curious as to how they compare.

[maxxum7d]

Well, the build quality of this lens is comparable to our cult $60 CC lens, no doubt. Infact the CC lens doesn't have a focus limit switch, or f/2.8-4 either. But I won't use both these lenses for the same reason: I don't feel as confidant using them as I do with my 80-200 or even 28-75mm.

My 80-200 has a slightly wobbly front element. If I try the focus ring, it moves maybe 3 milimiters either way. Manual focus makes a squeaky noise sometimes. I bought it in used condition and it was heavily used. Lots of dings and paint coming off.

But, it is a violently fast focusing lens with constant f/2.8 that is amazingly sharp corner to corner. If you look at the 100% crop uploaded on my photobucket from the vivitar, you'll find that the sharpness is questionable (even at f/8 and f/4). I'll do a direct testing against the 80-200 but with prejudice :ak47:

JimC wrote:

I didn' t expect that the build quality would be very good with a $79 lens.

Most reports you see of the cheaper Vivitar/Phoenix/Cosina lenses indicate that they are relatively "flimsy" (front elements wobbling, etc.). :-)

I'm not worried about that part. I wouldn't use one very often anyway (this lens is likely to get very little use). I'm just thinking that it might come in handy every once in a great while (for example, plays, dance recitals, or concerts where I'm too far away for my 100mm f/2 or 135mm f/2.8 ).

Take some photos with your 80-200mm f/2.8 at the same time as you take some from the Vivitar if you get a chance (trying both wide open and stopped down at various focal lengths). All else aside (build quality, AF speed, etc.), I'd be curious as to how they compare.

[JimC]

Looking at MTF charts I see for the Cosina version, it looks like it's going to be sharper on the wide end versus the long end, with edge sharpness suffering the most as focal lengths get longer.

But, center sharpness really didn't look too bad wide open from a some shots I've seen posted from it so far from KM DSLR owners that have it. For $79, you can't expect it to perform as well as G glass. ;-)

[maxxum7d]

so whats the review Jim?


JimC wrote:

Looking at MTF charts I see for the Cosina version, it looks like it's going to be sharper on the wide end versus the long end, with edge sharpness suffering the most as focal lengths get longer.

But, center sharpness really didn't look too bad wide open from a some shots I've seen posted from it so far from KM DSLR owners that have it. For $79, you can't expect it to perform as well as G glass. ;-)

[meanstreak]

maxxum7d wrote:

so whats the review Jim?


JimC wrote:

It's better than the "G" glass but he's keeping it a secret.

[JimC]

maxxum7d wrote:

so whats the review Jim?

I haven't used it yet. I just got around to opening it yesterday to make sure it arrived intact.

I was out taking a few photos last night. But, a 70-210mm would not have been my lens of choice for a small indoor birthday dinner. I used my Minolta 24-85mm for that, along with my "expensive" Sunpak 333 Auto (purchased for $25 in "as new in box" condition from the used dept. at B&H). lol

This Vivitar won't get much use. The longest lens I normally use is my Tamron 35-105mm f/2.8. Before this Vivitar, my longest lens in Maxxum mount was my Minolta 135mm f/2.8, and it's rarely used (too long on a DSLR for what I normally shoot).

I was hoping I'd go fishing this morning and bring this new Vivitar along to test drive. But, I wasn't able to make it. Unfortunatley, I'm playing "chauffeur" for my wife right now (she tore a tendon in her foot and can't drive).