Old zoom lenses

ChrisR

ChrisR

I'm a well known grump...
Suspended / Banned
Messages
11,730
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got a reasonable range of prime lenses for my Pentax cameras (2*28, 35, 2*50, 85, 100, 135mm primes), plus a massive and heavy Tamron-f 85-210mm zoom. I never use the latter except for some particular purpose, and I'm usually out with just the one prime on the camera. That's normally just fine, but sometimes it's a bit limiting, so when I spotted a mis-described Pentax-A 28-80mm zoom at a very low price, I thought it was worth a punt.

At the time I thought I was getting the SMC version, but it was actually the non-coated version, which is heavier. Quite soft, too, but happily I've managed to sell it for about what I paid. So far, so good.

There are a couple of SMC lenses (the SMC Pentax-A 28-80 and the SMC Pentax 35-70mm f/4) which get a decent review on Pentaxforum, but generally seem hard to come by. Most of the 28-80 versions I see one the evil bay, even those described as SMC, are clearly the non-SMC version. The was even an evil bay one offered by Ffordes that from the pics is mis-described, at £59 too IIRC! Ffordes do have a 28-80 SMC at £49 on their own web site, which from the pics does appear to be properly described, and I'm currently havering over it.

The trouble is, if I get it and can't get on with it, or I'm still getting soft results, it's going to be much harder to get my £50 back than the tenner on the first lens.

So, I'm really asking something weird, like: are 1980s-era zoom lenses ever worth it on 35mm film cameras?

Discuss, please!
 
good question, when I got into film I tried a few, mainly a 28-80 and another that skips me and yes they were ok, but they started at F3.5 and at the long end were F4.5.

For my style of togggraphy and low light they just didn't work.
 
Mr Bump said:
...but they started at F3.5 and at the long end were F4.5.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's part of what worries me. There's a Pentax-M 35-70 f/2.8-3.5 which gets very good reviews, but it's back up to 470gm (similar to the non-SMX 28-80, rather more than the 350 gm for the SMC Pentax-A versions) and is expensive and hard to find.
 
As I understand it, old zoom lenses are generally not a good as the modern kit lens. If you wanted one it was because you needed a wide range but either didn't have the budget to fill it with primes or didn't want the weight. If you can avoid using them I would./
 
I reckon you should be safe with the correctly described one from Ffordes, although if it's just a change of mind or doesn't meet expectations that causes a return, they're probably entitled to charge a restocking fee (or at least postage each way!) From memory, the Vivitar Series One 70-210(?) trombone zoom was the one to have back in the late '70s/early '80s but there were probably several versions...
 
yes (and well, only sort of...)

FD Lens Comparison by The Big Yin, on Flickr

the 35-105 f3.5 Macro Canon FD is absolutely wonderful - but it's big, and heavy (pretty sure it's at least as heavy as the 28-105 EF lens I've got for the autofocus Canon's) and while It SHOULD be a superb walkabout lens on the A1, its so heavy it feels unbalanced. It's fine with the Motor-Drive in place, and it'd be Beautifully balanced on a T90, but it's just a bit of a lump on the unacompanied A1 body.

the 70-210... well it's very "sort of" as well... but then I've only really got the EF70-200L to compare it with, and it's a bit of a "toothpick to a gunfight" situation really...
 
Most of the modern lens development has been fopr zoom lenses (although primes now seem to be having a renaissance) so in theory more modern zoom lenses should be better than old ones. On the other hand...

Back in the 1970s I was happily using an OM 75-150 lens with Kodachrome and couldn't complain about it (I still have the lens); and the OM 65-200mm is regularly used on a Sony a7r where it's sharp enough for me.

Most of the time I only use prime lenses (which isn't too difficult given that I don't use 35mm film) with film, but if it's fair to make comparisons based on how different lenses perform on a digital camera, then I haven't noticed much difference for general views etc. I don't use zooms for buildings and architecture where the distortion might show.

The only Pentax lenses I have (since I've never owned a Pentax camera) are the Vivitar Series 1 70-210 and the 28-80 (I think that that's the range) and they perform fine on a Sony a7r.
 
****So, I'm really asking something weird, like: are 1980s-era zoom lenses ever worth it on 35mm film cameras?***

Definately but you have to use the gems..at their sweet spot it's difficult to see the difference against a prime say for 10 X 8 print and have compared one of my favourite zooms up against a 135mm Sonnar and on the computer screen the zoom loses out on higher magnification. Of course every zoom has it's weak spots and it could be at either end of the magnification and maybe some distortion or chromatic aberration (e.g.. you might see say a purple colour fringe on a tree branch) also you can get copy variation, so for me I pick em up cheap test em and give away the ones I don't like.
Just threw away a Vivitar zoom series 1 (the original) that everyone raves about...no good to me if it doesn't get the results I want.
 
Last edited:
Have a late 70's, early 80's Nikkor AI 80-200mm F4.5 that I use when I don't feel like carrying a bag of primes. Have always been happy with the images & it only cost £30 from ebay a few years ago. Also have a Series 1 Vivitar in OM mount that seems OK. Think it's a 2nd edition IIRC. Have only ever shot XP2 with it so far though.
 
The best way to choose any lens (old or new) is to go on the net and see what everyone else thinks of it...and hope you don't get a bad copy.......someone said "all the best copies are kept and the rubbish goes on the bay" and there is probably some truth in it.
 
If you can find one, go for the Komine (version 3) 70-210 Series 1 with the Pentax 'A' setting. I have one and it is very good, it will stay at F2.8 all the way to 210mm. It is a little heavy though if that's a problem, but worth it :)

More info on the Series 1 HERE
 
My Vivitar series 1 (original) was made by Tokina and most say the one made by Kiron is the one to get..anyway I only paid a few quid for it at the bootie and didn't care throwing it away.. Some Tamrons can be very good and have a few. Also have Pentax A 35mm-70 f3.5-f4.5 and Pentax M 24-35mm f3.5 and Pentax M 75-150m f4..haven't used them much and first impressions was nothing outstanding, anyway for 24mm-35mm I prefer to use my VG primes.
 
Thanks folks. I have a VERY nice Vivitar Series 1 (Komine) 28mm, but I also have a not-bad Tamron-f 85-210, so I don't need any more to cover the latter range (which does seem to be very popular for 3rd party zoom lenses). I was looking for a wide-to-mid zoom as a walkabout lens. I did have a Tamron Adaptall-2 28-50, not bad results but fiddly to use, surprisingly heavy, and seemed to need wider apertures (or slower shutter speeds) than other lenses for the same exposure, so I sold that one. Something bracketing the 50mm was the idea.

I've been having a rethink though, harking back to this...
steveo_mcg said:
As I understand it, old zoom lenses are generally not a good as the modern kit lens. If you wanted one it was because you needed a wide range but either didn't have the budget to fill it with primes or didn't want the weight. If you can avoid using them I would.
Click to expand...

I did notice the awkwardness using the 28-80 I just got rid of, and rather than convincing myself to buy yet another, I think I'll stick with my primes, maybe look for a 28mm f/2 or a 24mm as I don't have anything that wide....
 
If you don't want to be swapping lenses too much on the Pentax MX, you could do what I used to ... buy another Pentax MX body. I used to have a very compact bag that could carry two MX's with 28mm and 50mm lenses fitted ... or just one with the 35mm lens fitted.

After a while I sold the MX gear but I have noticed myself looking at ones for sale again !
 
My recollection on zooms in the good old days was that they became popular because "advanced" amateurs used colour slide film (only snapshooters used print film, apart from the dedicated minority who made colour prints at home). And colour slides have no potential for cropping unless you want your slide shows disrupted with different sized images. Zooms let you crop exactly in camera, giving the same flexibility that cropping under the enlarger gave you with prints.

There was certainly a great deal of prejudice against zooms, particularly those with large zoom ranges (read "anything over a factor of 2). Modern techniques weren't really available at a convenient price - aspherical elements had to be ground by hand, for example; and newer optical materials weren't much used due to cost and delicacy/fragility.

The lenses I used with my OM system - the ones I took on holiday when size and weight mattered - were the 21mm, 50mm and 75-150mm. If just two lenses, then the 21mm and a 90mm macro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top