raid
Dad Photographer
Has anyone ever seen this lens for sale or being reviewed?
raid
Dad Photographer
Anyways, I was taking a lens to my local camera repairman when I saw a gentleman with a lens in front of him. It turned out to be the rather rare Vivitar Professional 135mm/1.5 lens. He uses the lens for available light photography. Once, he mailed the lens to Vivitar, and they told him that they had no clue of the existence of such a Vivitar lens.
The lens is in T mount, and he can use several adapters for different SLR systems. What would be the depth of field at 1.5?
Must be awesome!
The lens is in T mount, and he can use several adapters for different SLR systems. What would be the depth of field at 1.5?
Must be awesome!
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
raid said:
At 10 feet, about 1.5 inches. (according to some online DOF calculator)
Sounds like a cool lens.
raid
Dad Photographer
I found some write-up on this lens. It is not sharp. The 135/2.3 Vivitar lens is the one that was praised instead. Still, not everything is sharpness. For special photos, I bet that this lens kicks a$$.
Nokton48
Mentor
Raid,
I sometimes use a 135mm f1.8 Spiratone lens on my many Minoltas.
Indeed, when I need speed, it does kick a$$.
Great "look", IMHO.
I sometimes use a 135mm f1.8 Spiratone lens on my many Minoltas.
Indeed, when I need speed, it does kick a$$.
Great "look", IMHO.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
I remember seeing ads for the Vivitar "back in the day." It was a T-mount lens with a preset diaphragm, rather than a full auto diaphragm. Of course, since you probably wouldn't use it unless you needed the wide aperture, this would be less of an inconvenience than it usually was.
I'd have loved to try one, but never did. I did have a 135/1.8 Sigma, which I believe is the same lens that was sold under the Spiratone brand name. I used it, but it was quite soft and flarey at full aperture. Eventually I gave it to a friend who did atmospheric portraiture; the look it gave was perfect for her. I went out and bought a 135mm f/2 Minolta MD lens, which was fully sharp and usable even at full aperture. I sold it when I got out of my manual-focus Minolta system, but I always regretted letting it go.
I'd have loved to try one, but never did. I did have a 135/1.8 Sigma, which I believe is the same lens that was sold under the Spiratone brand name. I used it, but it was quite soft and flarey at full aperture. Eventually I gave it to a friend who did atmospheric portraiture; the look it gave was perfect for her. I went out and bought a 135mm f/2 Minolta MD lens, which was fully sharp and usable even at full aperture. I sold it when I got out of my manual-focus Minolta system, but I always regretted letting it go.
zgeeRF
Established
Raid,
I have the 135 f/2.3 Vivitar (Series 1) in Nikon F mount. It's a hefty piece of glass (quite heavy) and It is quite sharp. I'll try to take a picture of it and some examples with it when I get a chance.
I have the 135 f/2.3 Vivitar (Series 1) in Nikon F mount. It's a hefty piece of glass (quite heavy) and It is quite sharp. I'll try to take a picture of it and some examples with it when I get a chance.
ferider
Mentor
I've only seen it references once or twice for M42, Raid.
If you want that shallow DOF, try a 180 or 200/2.8.
Best,
Roland.
If you want that shallow DOF, try a 180 or 200/2.8.
Best,
Roland.
zgeeRF
Established
raid
Dad Photographer
I could use my CZJ 180mm/2.8 [in Pentacon 6 mount] on a Canon FD body via an adapter. Equally good is the Canon 200mm/2.8. They are not 1.5 lenses though.
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
zgeeRF said:
I also own this lens in the same mount...It is a heavy chunk of glass but worth carrying around...
I found that the Nikon HN-20 lenshood works better than the one on it...
A heavy lens that's a bit slow to use compared to the AF lenses but worth it...
I have read a few articles about the 1.5 and may have seen one on Ebay $$$
Abbazz
6x9 and be there!
From an old thread on Photo.net:
I counted 17 blades, but I might be out by one or two.
I found some more info on Robert Monaghan's webpage on cult-classic third party lenses:
"I should mention that there were a few even faster 135mm f/1.8 and even f/1.5 lenses made by Vivitar in 1968, using the preset T-mount. But these lenses were much poorer performers optically than the later Series I 135mm f/2.3 lenses. Avoid them!"
Here's another excerpt from Robert Monaghan:
"[Ed. note: Thanks to Gregg for this chart; unfortunately, I feel it supports my conclusion that the lens is too low resolution used wide open, that you would be better with a much lighter and smaller lens (like the Vivitar 135mm f/2.3 Series I cited above) which is sharper and quite usable wide open...]
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 From: Gregg [email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: re: Vivitar 135 1.5
Robert,
Wow, what an incredible data base of third party lenses! Congratulations on such outstanding work.
I have one contribution, correction to make. I recently came across the Aug/Sept 1967 edition of Camera 35, which includes a brief review and test of the Vivitar 135 f/1.5 T-mount on page 57.
The following info may by useful:
Reported resolution:
Center Edges f/1.5 24 17 /2.0 28 24 /2.8 28 24 /4.0 34 28 /5.6 40 34 /8.0 48 40 /11.0 56 48 /16.0 68 48 * Max Res /22.0 56 40
I don't know if the rated resolution is lines per mm, or inch, but it is interesting that the lens apparently doesn't reach maximum resolution until f/16
Dimensions: 5" long, 4" wide, 4lb,8oz (Vivitar ad in the same magazine says: 5.5" by 4", 4lb, 3 oz 7 elements, 6 groups, min focus 6 feet
Lastly, the article claims the lens was originally made for NASA, and that it lists for less than $600.00
keep up the amazing work, hope this helps. Gregg Humphrey "
Hi everyone, just wanted to say that I have one of those rare 135mm/1.5, mine is a Soligor not a Vivitar. Though I?m not 100% sure, I believe they were all made by Tomioka and branded as either Soligor, Vivitar or Porst (in Germany), probably Yashica too. I want to sell my unit but I can?t find someone willing to pay the right price in Spain, right now I?d let it go for $400USD. If anyone wants more information, pictures or whatever just let me know.
The lens doesn't look like particularly interesting IMHO. And 4 lb! Talk about a hefty piece of glass!
Cheers!
Abbazz
I counted 17 blades, but I might be out by one or two.
I found some more info on Robert Monaghan's webpage on cult-classic third party lenses:
"I should mention that there were a few even faster 135mm f/1.8 and even f/1.5 lenses made by Vivitar in 1968, using the preset T-mount. But these lenses were much poorer performers optically than the later Series I 135mm f/2.3 lenses. Avoid them!"
Here's another excerpt from Robert Monaghan:
"[Ed. note: Thanks to Gregg for this chart; unfortunately, I feel it supports my conclusion that the lens is too low resolution used wide open, that you would be better with a much lighter and smaller lens (like the Vivitar 135mm f/2.3 Series I cited above) which is sharper and quite usable wide open...]
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 From: Gregg [email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: re: Vivitar 135 1.5
Robert,
Wow, what an incredible data base of third party lenses! Congratulations on such outstanding work.
I have one contribution, correction to make. I recently came across the Aug/Sept 1967 edition of Camera 35, which includes a brief review and test of the Vivitar 135 f/1.5 T-mount on page 57.
The following info may by useful:
Reported resolution:
Center Edges f/1.5 24 17 /2.0 28 24 /2.8 28 24 /4.0 34 28 /5.6 40 34 /8.0 48 40 /11.0 56 48 /16.0 68 48 * Max Res /22.0 56 40
I don't know if the rated resolution is lines per mm, or inch, but it is interesting that the lens apparently doesn't reach maximum resolution until f/16
Dimensions: 5" long, 4" wide, 4lb,8oz (Vivitar ad in the same magazine says: 5.5" by 4", 4lb, 3 oz 7 elements, 6 groups, min focus 6 feet
Lastly, the article claims the lens was originally made for NASA, and that it lists for less than $600.00
keep up the amazing work, hope this helps. Gregg Humphrey "
Hi everyone, just wanted to say that I have one of those rare 135mm/1.5, mine is a Soligor not a Vivitar. Though I?m not 100% sure, I believe they were all made by Tomioka and branded as either Soligor, Vivitar or Porst (in Germany), probably Yashica too. I want to sell my unit but I can?t find someone willing to pay the right price in Spain, right now I?d let it go for $400USD. If anyone wants more information, pictures or whatever just let me know.
The lens doesn't look like particularly interesting IMHO. And 4 lb! Talk about a hefty piece of glass!
Cheers!
Abbazz
IGMeanwell
Well-known
Here is an old auction for one with an image
http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=337501
http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=337501
Abbazz
6x9 and be there!
If someone really feels the urge to buy this lens at once, there is one offered for sale on eBay (item #280129037015) by Kevin's Cameras. The price is a bit stiff though :bang:
Cheers!
Abbazz
Cheers!
Abbazz
raid
Dad Photographer
Abbaz,
The real price should be around $500 for such a lens, but ...
The real price should be around $500 for such a lens, but ...
raid
Dad Photographer
IGMeanwell said:Here is an old auction for one with an image
http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=337501
Thanks for the pics, Pete. The lens that I saw locally looked beaten up.
dazedgonebye
Mentor
I wonder how it performs at f2.3...the f1.5 lens that is.
raid
Dad Photographer
dazedgonebye said:
Hi Steve,
If I could get my hands on such a lens, I would gladly test the lens wide open. I read somewhere that the lens reaches its optimal [but not great] optical performance at f 16, the min aperture.
TWoK
-
Here is one for sale on FM: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/823872
I'd pick one up for $450, but not $1500ish...
I'd pick one up for $450, but not $1500ish...
sanmich
Mentor
what a beast!
The interesting part of the add:
Two technicians at Fotomehanika camera services in Slovenia took it apart in March this year, cleaned it, polished a few lens element inside and voila - I was given back a really nicely done piece of glass.
Good to know that such a service still exists after Kiev stopped to provide it...