Vintage vs New Prime Lens Shootout Review Featuring Rokinon Tamron Vivitar Kiron Tokina Glass

[@3Tortoise]

The Vivitar Series 1 28mm f/1.9 is indeed a Tokina manufactured lens dating back from 1977. The Vivitar 24mm f/2 lens is the #2 version from 1981 manufactured by Kino Precision (who also made Kinotel and Kiron lenses). It is effectively the same lens as the Kiron 24mm f/2 lens but might have different coatings. The earlier #1 version has a greater angle of mechanical focus from near to infinity. The Kiron 28mm f/2 was in production from 1980 through to 1986/7. You can also find the equivalent Vivitar branded lens (look for Vivitar serial numbers beginning 221xxxxx)

[@GlobalOffense]

How insightful, please share more of you amazing wisdom.

[@thedp]

sure you can turn on the LCD for still shooting if you prefer. you may need to also turn on exposure preview though for more accurate idea whats going on. I pretty much just set the camera to AV, iris to what I want and its good. what will mess you up are adapters that tell the camera body what iris is the wide open preset. that tricks the camera into applying a compensation. with those adapters I'll then take a test shot then typically dial a 1-3 stop neg compensation for good exposure

[@abbycasanova1380]

Helpful lens review Thanks

[@thedp]

the lenses in this review are what I had at hand. I did NOT HAVE 5 or 10 lenses of the same focal length... and really, seriously, it doesn't matter. it FAR FAR more about age / vintage than matching of focal length. the basic results here are actually pretty consistent. of course if anyone wants to send me a pile of glass for testing, I'm here !

[@ArcticGator]

Came to see the cute girl, stayed for all of the excellent info, a very well done video, subscribed!

[@bigshot00789]

Thank you!

[@Photographicelements]

which vivitar did you use? vivitar is a blanket brand, covering good, ok and bad manufactuers. if the vivitar you used is the komine build, then yes, great lens.

[@thedp]

+Photographic Elements the 28 is Tokina the 24 is Kiron.

[@thedp]

first, FD glass won't work on EF mounts w/o an adapter that has a glass element and it may or may not focus to infinity. I also owned that lens. don't buy it. they have problems where they lose critical focus. it requires the lens to be taken apart and adjusted to get critical focus back.

[@iviaverick52]

I know guys that use AI-s lenses on red Epics. Razor sharp even by todays standards.

[@michaelcavazos6002]

Did you do something to the ISO to use the aperture fully open? When I use vintage lenses and the aperture is wide open on a sunny day the pictures come out way too bright. And if I use the aperture ring all the way closed my pictures are normal but they lose all bokeh

[@thedp]

Michael Cavazos ND 1.2 ISO 160 on matte box. actually a ND1.8 is even better although when you get into the heavy end of ND filters, you may also need the IR versions as some cameras like RED don't have proper IR filtering on the sensor. basically if you use anything over 1.2, get a name brand glass tiffen / B&W ect filter. the cheap ones can cause color shifts & IR contamination ( warm blacks ). Vari-ND's can also cause visual artifacts and are best avoided.

[@thedp]

I mostly agree. The lenses I have appear clean of any leaking lube / oil and operate as expected. I don't think any sticking was a problem.

[@FilzSkillz]

+Steve Oakley Sorry, just to confirm since I'm new to SLR photography, if I want to shoot bokeh on 200 ISO film I'm going to have to use neutral density filters in order to let less light in so that I can fully open the aperture? Thanks

[@thedp]

theCreator yes you are correct.

[@michaelashcraft9098]

Raise your shutter speed

[@MarkAylwardz]

Hi, I was thinking to purchase a VIVITAR CANON EF 135mm F2.8 C.F. (KOMINE)` lens that was converted to Canon EOS EF mount. I would be using it on a Black Magic Cinematic Camera. Do you think it would be a good alternative to a new version since the cost would be at least twice as much...

[@thedp]

depends on if you need wide open to be the best i can be, or if you are shooting 1-2 stops down from wide open in which case the difference might really be none. I can say that the old FD glass has less contrast = apparent sharpness having owned both

[@MarkAylwardz]

From what I am hearing about the BMCC shooting RAW and 13 stops of dynamic range, I will have plenty of leaway at the 2 stops down from wide open that it should still perform pretty well without tons of additional lighting, hence I could save alot of money with this lens... Thanks Steve Oakley

[@KausthubDesikachar]

I am not sure of this lens comparison...as the focal lengths are all different and wide open apertures are also not the same. Its kind of strange. Not sure whats the point of this video...

[@thedp]

Kausthub Desikachar Not every thing in life is perfect. if I had access to a 1/2 dozen of the same focal length lenses I would of… but I didn't. the difference between 24 and 28 is minor. the rok 35 was the closest I had to the other focal lengths at the time so its really the only odd one out. the tamron 17-50 was shot at 24. if you look around you'll find lots of different lenses in the same focal length with different wide open apertures. additionally all tests were repeated at 2.8 and 5.6 as an equalizing factor. in the real world most folks mix and match glass likes and I have duplicate lenses in modern and vintage. I think this is a very decent test showing the differences between glass because its not all just bokeh. thats just one factor…. color rendition, sharpness, contrast, flare, coma, distortion and even CA all shape the look of a lens. the changes in color rendition were probably the more suprising.

[@shaolin95]

Kausthub Desikachar I agree. I came in very excited to see this but it makes no sense to compare all sorts of focal length lenses like this...there is really no comparison that can be done. Plus if you want to compare Vintage vs new ones, it will be better to get known gems from the Vintage era or at least the best brands like Canon FD lenses instead of Vivitar which could be anywhere from great to super junk depending on the time it was built and who built it for them. So I appreciate the idea but just does not work like this unfortunately.

[@thedp]

shaolin95 again, the difference between 24 and 28 mm is not much. throwing in a modern zoom @ 24mm is totally fair since so many people use lenses like this. so seeing how a zoom @ 24 matches in is TOTALLY good comparison. tell you what : if you would like to buy / borrow / find / rent me a collection of same focal length lenses and let me have them for a week or two I'll do an new set of tests. you know it takes a lot of time and effort to put something like this together…...

[@tron944]

What camera did you mount them on?

[@thedp]

At the time, I'd have to say it was a 60D this was shot on.

[@chungdha]

Its funny this shootout is totally showing way too different lenses, id say if all were 50mm or all are 28mm would had made more sense than total ofbeat numbers.

[@PaulDeanWells]

My take away from this video wasn't so much about whether or not each lens was of the same focal length or not. It was more so about how different lens choices offer a different artistic tool to tell a story. I find that comparing old and new in general makes that point very well. I find that for certain projects I will grab an old Vivitar before my L glass because the "imperfections" suite the vibe. If I am going for super sharp clinical images then sure, L glass it is. Sometimes a little old character just fits an image better. That was what I took from it anyway. Liked, subbed, & bell. I appreciate the work you put in to it :)

[@DaveDugdaleColorado]

Steve that was awesome, thanks for sharing all that. I learned a ton from it. I know those videos can take a long time to make so thanks for putting it together. dave dugdale

[@thedp]

I'd stay away from that lens. it has a problem where it looses critical focus internally. requires service to get it back. how do I know ? because I owned one back in the day... skip it.

[@shane8109]

Great info! I've been looking for something like this

[@Harvestcreativemedia]

Have you used Vivitar 35mm Ultra Fast F/1.4 lens? If yes how is the overall performance compare to Rokinon and Samyang?

[@thedp]

Harvest Creative Media no I haven't but it sounds like a nice lens… I'd expect it to be inline with other vintage lenses like I reviewed here… bottom line don't expect great wide open performance but get it to 2.8 or 4 and it should be nice

[@dustinkruisman]

Very nice shootout. I recently spotted a Canon FD 35-105 f/3.5 on ebay. Now I wonder because 3.5 is wide open, though not extremely shallow how the sharpness will be. But for I shooting I plan to do I think the newer lenses will work out better :)

[@injairgun]

Thanks for posting, I am having a blast using my Pentacon f/1.8 50mm prime and my Opticam f/2.8 135mm prime on my Canon T3i. I got the bug and am now shopping for a few different lenses.

[@marcmediapro5539]

Great work and lenses .. Whats ur advice for my first vintage cine lens ? (btw ur motion graphic intro is ok but if u thinking to update it to a new one im 3d.vfx artist :) ) thanks and keep on ..

[@heddletownsenduroridetwo3943]

Good job and review I have literally a boat load of lenses to go through I don't even know where to start.. lol :)

[@thedp]

I think...this is a while ago. the vivtar 28 1.9 is a tokina.

[@NotASpyReally]

I don't get it. There are fake photos here? which are real and which are fake? I suppose he explains it in the video already but I'm spanish and I don't understand all english words

[@thedp]

There is NOTHING fake. I have no idea where you get that idea from. all shots where taken with the lenses as noted and are the real results.

[@NotASpyReally]

ok lol :P I thought the video was about making fake photos xD

[@MichaelPlochmann]

:/ Although I like this review and would recommend it, I have some issues with this. Comparing lenses of different focal lengths can be misleading because of the bokeh rendition, which is a big part of why you would choose a lens. Also, the Rokinon/Samyang 35mm is very damn sharp, like better than almost any other 35mm by comparison, it beats Canon L series in tests- so it's like comparing a tank to a rusty dagger when thrown up against Vivitar series 2, or Kinon which even at the time of manufacturing was lack luster. Honestly, only the Takumar 35mm could hold a flame to it. Furthermore, the Rok/Sam has awful bokeh and clinical colors. I love it for interviews and doc stuff for the sharpness and focus pull- but for cinematic work it just doesn't have the bokeh~ my opinion of it is that bad. Another minor issue is all, save the Nikon, 24mm lenses are considered no buy by lens hunters. At least i.m.o., all the below 35mm vintage glass I have is trash worthy and I love collecting lenses. On 135 film I love the Nikon f/2, but once it hits a digital sensor something stops working (infact what happens in bent light rays from the corners, modern lenses force lenses to come in straight and not an angle). I think a comparison of 135mm, 85mm, and 50mm would give you results that are debatable whereas this test just relishes in personal perception with proof. Again, glad to see vintage lenses respected.

[@thedp]

Evan Kimball well surprisingly I've shot with some canon cine glass and wasn't terribly impressed. mechanics are great but they reeked of still lens design in new housing :( Sure it would of been nice to of gotten several same focal length lenses together, but I think they are close enough in length 24/28 on the vintage glass. I wasn't really as much looking at bokeh as wide open ver stopped down performance… and color rendition surprised me on some of these lenses where they where as different as they are. I use the Rok 35 a lot. clinical color is good when shoot chromakey setups. Keys from it are easy every time. Its certainly a 4K ready lens. I did have a Takumar 50 1.4 and sold it :/. It made nice images but the backwards focus was a problem. I still have a Meyer Optik 50 1.8 I got in antique store for $20, and mostly use a OM 50 1.4 which I declicked. Its a great piece of glass, problem is its so compact its harder to use with full rig. my conclusion after much more testing past this : Rok's are great modern glass for sharpness and having a set is good… so is also having a set of vintage primes depending on the images you need to make. Then a friend with G4 and Veydra primes is another story. smaller sensor but those lenses are very nice in general except they flare easily and matte box required

[@sk84life2562]

It blew my mind when i noticed that picture was taken on the 400 block in Wausau. Cool video!

[@tptrsn]

Fantastic video, thanks!!! :)

[@samucabral]

Nice! But would be good to see how legacy lenses behave with a good nd filter.

[@marcmediapro5539]

Pentex or chinon or zeint ??? Ive to chose .. Plz whats ur adive which is clean sharper lens for videos ???

[@thedp]

unless you shoot 4K the differences except wide open can be pretty small. the rokinon glass is great and affordable. the russian glass can also be good... if you can some good ones. they also have more blades in their apertures which is REALLY nice. pentax is ok, but they focus backwards :(….. don't get vintage glass for "best sharpness" wide open… but 2-3 stops down and they are fine.

[@kwengca]

Nice video, your title mentions tokina though, which lens was the tokina?

[@thedp]

well having done that :) a GOOD glass ND filter by a major name maker just let you do as you expect - shoot wider open and enjoy the look that these lenses make at wide open -> 2.8 or 4. I had a cheaper Plastic AKA Resin ND and is was soft. most noticeable at over 100mm, less so the wider you got.

[@thedp]

it would be the vivitar in this case.

[@thedp]

the vivitar 28 1.9 does indeed flare quite a bit wide open. thats clear from the flare tests at the end. stop it down to 4 or 5.6 and its ok. if you want clean wide open then its not the best choice.

[@ohio_dino]

I wish you explained this faster.

[@GodfreyMann]

Regarding your comments on flare reducing contrast on old lenses, due to them having poorer multicoats, can this be rectified by putting a modern filter on the old lens? E.g. a Zeiss T* UV filter, which has the latest Zeiss T* anti-reflective coating (www.zeiss.co.uk/camera-lenses/en_gb/camera_lenses/accessories/uv_filters.html)

[@thedp]

no. all the coatings across various elements play a role in a lens's contrast and flare. this is especially true between elements, and the rear element which may catch reflections off of the sensor. while such a filter might reduce frontal flare a bit, it won't change the contrast / flare within the lens

[@GodfreyMann]

Thanks for that clarification....it's interesting to hear that elements within a lens also have coatings.

[@thedp]

yes... some more than others which may have none except back and front. zooms certainly have coatings on internal elements or they wouldn't work because of all the glass they have. also any shiny parts on the inside of the lens - rings, barrels, etc can also cause flare. its rare to see unpainted parts, but sometimes you do...

[@datalaforge]

This was very informative.

[@gatelouzos]

what about zeiss distagon 35mm f2.8?

[@tirachina]

Something that I always wanted to know. Thanks.

[@aimeecute4216]

the best review I have seen. when we are always shooting portraits,,it's good to use portraits as examples

[@thedp]

thanks I appreciate it... not always easy to do something like this with all the tests... but worth it ! :)

[@whereisthefilm]

Thanks for lens review. Keep it up. I'd love to see more of these lens reviews, perhaps in the range of 10 to 20 mm and older nikon glass.

[@D1N02]

There is a Vivitar version of the Kiron (serial starts with 22)

[@thedp]

+D1N02 probably... never looked specifically but I'm sure you could try eBay, or wiki on vivitar lens history as they often made 2 or 3 vers of some lenses, or in the case of their 80-200 and 70-210 there are something like 7 vers out there

[@DaleKamp]

Really helpful. Thank you.

[@EvertvanIngen]

Is that the hair color of Rainbow Dash?

[@normietwiceremoved]

+Evert van Ingen wow gay

[@thedp]

thank you. ... some one asked some where, but the camera I used was a 60D

[@Beyond2Horizon]

Great review, beautiful model.

[@choonwahyee9101]

Vintage lenses are good too!Nikon ,Minolta , tokina, zoom lens! Good

[@squatchmaster5000]

Nice, thanks

[@JasonBornTV]

Great video

[@IWTBFOY]

I just watch eternal sunshine of the spotless mind last night, and your model remind me of Clementine.

[@thedp]

well at the expense of being complete, I guess pick 1

[@gatler05]

Or just go Ai-s

[@sulphuricacid16]

please do a fujinon xmount lense on new nikon or canon

[@andrenj1970]

cool

[@hofceo8341]

it wouldve been a better line up if you had a vintage nikon 50mm 1.4 nikkor

[@caveartfilms434]

HOF CEO I agree. The Nikon is a legend so it should be the benchmark. I've got a Super Takumar and a Helios 44

[@thedp]

HOF CEO well it would of been better if I'd had a 24/28mm nikkor… but I didn't have one and don't know anyone I could borrow one from ….also because nikon glass focuses backwards its not on most people's use list.

[@caveartfilms434]

Steve Oakley It's just that you keep hearing people go on about them that it would be nice to actually see them in action.

[@hofceo8341]

Steve Oakley i had to adjust to the backwards focusing my self, also working full manual. All worth it. Since I have the 50mm,28mm, & 100mm nikkor lenses i just like to see how other ppl uses them & compare to other lenses vintage or newer. I found your video because of searching 50mm nikkor ais comparisons

[@hofceo8341]

Cave Art Films shooting video with the 50mm AIS nikkor 1.4 at night on a highway is pure amazing. Bokeh is even better taking photos/vids. the 100mm will turn anything in the foreground to butter

[@thedp]

small world... ain't it :)

[@bedeverecurry7122]

Great review! Thanks

[@SuperKuszi]

thank you, a great comparison!