>Steve wrote:
>
>>I have yet another lens I'd like an opinion on!
>>It's another Vivitar - this time the Series 1 28-90mm (f2.8 I think, I
>>was looking through a shop window).
>>It's $US75. Does anyone have any experience of this lens?
>
>Yes, this is my favourite zoom. This year I took it along on a holiday to
>Spain and hardly needed anything else. I like it because of the very useful
>focal range, specially the 28 mm focal length, and the high speed. Because
>of this high speed a good off-brand teleconverter can be used to add a 180
>mm focal length (something you typically wouldn't want to try on a F4-5.6
>zoom). It performs very good. Its actual speed is 2.8-3.6, so only a 2/3
>stop speed reduction at the tele side. I think it is an upgraded version of
>the Vivitar Series I 35-85/2.8, which is a very bulky lens. Like this lens,
>it is not a true zoom but has a varifocal design (focus changes when the
>focal length is adjusted). This obviously is not ideal, but you get used to
>it quickly. This lens also has a cool macro setting at the 28 mm. side -
>not very good for insects, but interesting for plants; the very short
>shooting distance combined with the wide angle can produce bizarre
>perspective effects. I think $US75 is a very good price, at least when it
>is in good condition.
>
>Hans
Hello, I have a test from "Stiftung Warentest" from December, 1982:
Focal length 28 50 90
General picture quality + + +
Distorsion o o +
"Strange" light o o o
Vignetting o o o
Consistency of picture plane o
Max. magnification 1:3,3 at 28mm
Quality of macro photos o
General result in picture quality: + (good)
______________________________________________________
precision of the f-stop values ++
stability ++
General result of mechanical quality: ++ (very good)
______________________________________________________
Attendance + (good)
______________________________________________________
General result + (good)
______________________________________________________
This means, the lens is clear above average. In these tests, I have never
seen a "very good" zoom and this zoom has no "-" (insufficient) as a single
result.
Matthias
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|