Re: Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
Hi, I bought Tamron manual SP 90/2.8 macro for my PZ-1 but adapatall has not reach me so far:( I have read some reviews of the lens and in German tests it performed super. And I have found Popular/Practical ( I do not remember which it was)Photography test of some macro lenses and Tamron got 9/10 and only canon USM beat it.It performed better than Nikkor and Pentax FA. So it must be very good beast! Alek Uytkownik Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Hi, adphoto. Of the 4 which is the better macro? Well, you have to be more specific, or expand your 4 - There are (as far as I know) only one VS1 90/2.5, one VS1 105/2.5, and one Kiron 105/2.8. However, there have been at least three Tamron 90mm macros - the original (I believe) 90/2.5 with 49mm threads, another 90/2.5 but with 55mm threads, and a 90/2.8 (which, I think, is the newest one). (I am not knowledgeable about Tamron macro lenses, so, anyone who knows more than this, please jump in here.) Then, although you didn't mention them, there have been other 90's - the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 (optically identical to the VS1), a Vivitar non-VS1 90/2.8, a Sigma 90/2.8 - and there probably are still others... And Ricoh has a 100/2.8 or 105/2.8 (I forget which)... And then, of course, there are a few great Pentax 100's... And, to confuse things further, some of these reach 1:1 all by themselves, while some use an extension tube to do so, and some (e.g., the VS1 90/2.5 and the AT-X 90/2.5) use an extender with internal field-flattening elements to do so. is the 105mm 2.5 S1 vivitar the same as the 105mm 2.8 kiron? Supposedly they are the same (although I've never had a chance to check out the Kiron). Is the series 1 vivitar 90mm as good as its cult status ? Yes indeed. However, I've ~never~ tried a 100-ish (90mm-105mm) macro lens that was not a very good lens (and I've never heard bad things about any, either, except for a Sigma 100/2.8 Micro-Macro compromise that was apparently pretty soft closeup). Fred ***r-e-k-l-a-m-a** Chcesz oszczdzi na kosztach obsugi bankowej ? mBIZNES - konto dla firm http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbiznes
Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
Hi, I can vouch for the VS1 90/2.5 is as good as its cult status. I can`t say anything about the other lenses because I`ve never owned them, but I`m sure they are very fine lenses. However, the VS1 90/2.5 is sharp corner to corner even at f2.5 and exhibits a kind of 3D effect. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film. - Original Message - From: adphoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pdml [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 9:36 PM Subject: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm Of the 4 which is the better macro? is the 105mm 2.5 S1 vivitar the same as the 105mm 2.8 kiron? Is the series 1 vivitar 90mm as good as its cult status ?
Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
Hi, adphoto. Of the 4 which is the better macro? Well, you have to be more specific, or expand your 4 - There are (as far as I know) only one VS1 90/2.5, one VS1 105/2.5, and one Kiron 105/2.8. However, there have been at least three Tamron 90mm macros - the original (I believe) 90/2.5 with 49mm threads, another 90/2.5 but with 55mm threads, and a 90/2.8 (which, I think, is the newest one). (I am not knowledgeable about Tamron macro lenses, so, anyone who knows more than this, please jump in here.) Then, although you didn't mention them, there have been other 90's - the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 (optically identical to the VS1), a Vivitar non-VS1 90/2.8, a Sigma 90/2.8 - and there probably are still others... And Ricoh has a 100/2.8 or 105/2.8 (I forget which)... And then, of course, there are a few great Pentax 100's... And, to confuse things further, some of these reach 1:1 all by themselves, while some use an extension tube to do so, and some (e.g., the VS1 90/2.5 and the AT-X 90/2.5) use an extender with internal field-flattening elements to do so. is the 105mm 2.5 S1 vivitar the same as the 105mm 2.8 kiron? Supposedly they are the same (although I've never had a chance to check out the Kiron). Is the series 1 vivitar 90mm as good as its cult status ? Yes indeed. However, I've ~never~ tried a 100-ish (90mm-105mm) macro lens that was not a very good lens (and I've never heard bad things about any, either, except for a Sigma 100/2.8 Micro-Macro compromise that was apparently pretty soft closeup). Fred
Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
Hi, Steve. Is the series 1 vivitar 90mm as good as its cult status ? I can vouch for the VS1 90/2.5 is as good as its cult status. I can`t say anything about the other lenses because I`ve never owned them, but I`m sure they are very fine lenses. However, the VS1 90/2.5 is sharp corner to corner even at f2.5 and exhibits a kind of 3D effect. I have a few test macro shots taken using both the VS1 90/2.5 Macro with and without its 1:1 Macro Adapter and its optical twin (separated at birth - g), the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 Macro, with and without its 1:1 Macro Extender - VS1 @ 4:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Adapter) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v9025/v9025-41-8.jpg VS1 @ 2:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Adapter) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v9025/v9025-21-8.jpg VS1 @ 1:1 @ f/8 (with 1:1 Macro Adapter) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v9025/v9025-11-8.jpg AT-X @ 4:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Extender) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/x9025/x9025-41-8.jpg AT-X @ 2:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Extender) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/x9025/x9025-21-8.jpg AT-X @ 1:1 @ f/8 (with 1:1 Macro Extender) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/x9025/x9025-11-8.jpg Fred
Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
Hi Fred, I would say they are all pretty similar in resolving power and color. I know the bokeh and 3D effect comes into play nicely when the subject matter has more depth, regarding the 90/2.5, and that would be without the 1:1 adapter. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film. - Original Message - From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 7:51 AM Subject: Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm Hi, Steve. Is the series 1 vivitar 90mm as good as its cult status ? I can vouch for the VS1 90/2.5 is as good as its cult status. I can`t say anything about the other lenses because I`ve never owned them, but I`m sure they are very fine lenses. However, the VS1 90/2.5 is sharp corner to corner even at f2.5 and exhibits a kind of 3D effect. I have a few test macro shots taken using both the VS1 90/2.5 Macro with and without its 1:1 Macro Adapter and its optical twin (separated at birth - g), the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 Macro, with and without its 1:1 Macro Extender - VS1 @ 4:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Adapter) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v9025/v9025-41-8.jpg VS1 @ 2:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Adapter) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v9025/v9025-21-8.jpg VS1 @ 1:1 @ f/8 (with 1:1 Macro Adapter) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v9025/v9025-11-8.jpg AT-X @ 4:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Extender) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/x9025/x9025-41-8.jpg AT-X @ 2:1 @ f/8 (without 1:1 Macro Extender) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/x9025/x9025-21-8.jpg AT-X @ 1:1 @ f/8 (with 1:1 Macro Extender) - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/x9025/x9025-11-8.jpg Fred
Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
I'm not in a position to offer much reply on comparison between these lenses. I bought a 105mm 2.5 Series One some years ago and at the time noticed that its publihed test performance seemed generally superior to the much older 90mm 2.5 Series One. That's to be expected with a design some 10+ years newer, a more complex optical design and internal zoom type mechanics which alter the element/group spacings as the lens is focussed to maximize optical performance over the entire focus range, unlike the 90mm 2.5. My 105mm Vivitar has performance sufficient for me to make 16x20 inch prints from most of a full 35mm frame which compare favorably against similar prints made from medium format negatives. Modern Photo did a test comparison of this lens against the 105mm 2.8 Micro Nikkor - performance virtually the same overall. My one big knock the 105mm Series One - weight. It's big; It's heavy. You can get tired of hefting it around. I do not know how it compares in this to the other lenses you are considering. One final consideration - the 105mm Series One doesn't come along that often, so one in nice condition might be a little hard to find in your choice of lens mount. The Tamron has a very good reputation, but I suspect that with a little inquiry, you already know more about it than I do. The maunual version of this lens does, or at least did, use the Tamron interchargeable mount system, so if you can find a good deal on th lens in any mount, fitting it to your camera is not a problem. I do or have used three different Tamrom lenses with this interchangeable mount. It works fine. Once you fit the mount adapter to the lens, you wouldn't notice that it is interchangeable. Randy Stewart - Original Message - From: adphoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pdml [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 9:36 PM Subject: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm Of the 4 which is the better macro? is the 105mm 2.5 S1 vivitar the same as the 105mm 2.8 kiron? Is the series 1 vivitar 90mm as good as its cult status ?
Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
I used to own the Kiron 105/2.8PK; I now own the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5PK. The Kiron didn't deliver sharp results until about f/5.6. That's why I sold it; I use my portrait-length lens for general purpose, including shooting indoor events under available light. The Tokina is very sharp, even at f/2.5. I get such sharp results at f/2.5, I almost feel as though I'm cheating. Its colors are noticeably snappier and more saturated, too. Note that the Tokina 90/2.5 focuses in the same direction as Pentax; the Vivitar 90/2.5 does not. However, the Vivitar's 1:1 macro adapter has a built-in tripod ring, unlike the other macros discussed in this thread. Of course, you could match the Vivitar's adapter with the Tokina lens. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vivitar 90mm 2.5 vs 105mm 2.5 vs105mm2.8 kiron vs tamron 90mm
Randy: I bought a 105mm 2.5 Series One some years ago and at the time noticed that its publihed test performance seemed generally superior to the much older 90mm 2.5 Series One. I haven't (yet) seen any test of the VS1 105/2.5. Do you have the details? Or, do you at least have the publication issue information? That's to be expected with a design some 10+ years newer, a more complex optical design and internal zoom type mechanics which alter the element/group spacings as the lens is focussed to maximize optical performance over the entire focus range, unlike the 90mm 2.5. It would seem that Vivitar could improve on an old design from the 1970's, right? g However, I should point out that, in the VS1 90/2.5 Macro, the internal zoom type mechanics which [also] alter the element/group spacings as the lens is focused to maximize optical performance over the entire focus range. I do have to admit that I don't know as much about the VS1 105/2.5 Macro's internal details (although I did own one for a time), and I can't say whether it does or does not have a more complex optical design. In a sense, the inconvenience of the 90/2.5's 1:1 adapter might even be considered as an example of its own design complexity - g. My 105mm Vivitar has performance sufficient for me to make 16x20 inch prints from most of a full 35mm frame which compare favorably against similar prints made from medium format negatives. I do have some scans of some macro test shots taken with the VS1 105/2.5 and the VS1 90/2.5 (and the AT-X 90/2.5, and the A 100/2.8, and the A 100/4, and the A* 200/4, and...]. While I have never blown any macro shots up to 16x20 (whew!), I have to say that all of these lenses do perform both really quite well and surprisingly also quite similarly. Comparing the prints side-by-side, I can occasionally find one lens may be just slightly better in one corner than another lens in that corner, but then I can often find the situation reversed in another corner (which probably shows more about my technique than it probably does about anything else - g). In any event, while I've recently put the scans of the VS1 and AT-X 90/2.5 twins on-line (with the URL's provided in another thread), I suppose I should get them all on-line...] Fred
