authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

I was looking at a lens yesterday which has a constant aperture of F3.5. I am looking for a telephoto for doing indoor work in the school theater where only the stage is illuminated. The lens was a Vivitar Series 1 70~200 3.5 version 2 made by Tokina. My question is F3.5 wide enough for should I pass and keep looking for a 2.8? What caught my eye was the low price of $75, the good reviews I have seen from users on the web and the like new condition for a 40 year old lens built like a tank. I know it is a manual lens which does not bother me as I would use it on my Nikon D300.

Thanks

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

I know nothing about the particular lens your interested in but I am quite experienced with indoor photography using a relatively slow zoom lens.
When I don't need to go wide I use a 70-200 f/2.8 but when I do want or need to go wide I use my Canon 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L zoom. If the subject or area you are photographing is well lit you should be ok. You're only talking about a $75 expenditure so it's not like you're spending over $2000 for a lens that may or may not do the job.
Since the lens is f/3.5 you will be using a higher ISO to keep the shutter speed up but since your primary subject is a stage and they are usually well lit, the f/3.5 lens should do the job.
Good luck and have fun.

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

Thanks rmorrison1116

I do have a 30 day return privilege if not happy so I guess I can not go wrong.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

For indoor shooting, often f3.5 or even f2.8 isn't "fast" enough. f2.8 is only 2/3 stop faster than f3.5 anyway. And, it appears from your signature that you have a 60/2.8 macro, which would be just as low light capable as any f2.8 lens.

You might want to look at prime lenses instead of zooms. For example, 85/2, 85/1.8, 85/1.4, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 50/1.2 are all one, two or even up to 2 and 2/3 stops faster than f2.8. Primes are often smaller and can be less expensive than fast zooms, too (though not $75 and, admittedly, f1.2 lenses usually are pretty pricey).

For example, this was shot with an 85/1.8 lens wide open at f1.8, and with ISO 1600 and 1/80 shutter speed...


The only light source for the above was what was being reflected from the projection screen.

The thing is, in addition to their light gathering abilities, "fast" lenses with large apertures also render shallower depth of field, which may or may not work for what you are trying to shoot. This is more pronounced in longer focal lengths.

Here is another shot from the same shoot, this time with more illumination from the modeling lamp of a large studio strobe (about 250 watts). Same lens at f2, ISO 1600 and 1/400...


It may be a little hard to see above, in small size and internet resolution, but notice the subject's hand and the wine bottle are slightly out of focus due to the shallow depth of field that's naturally rendered by the telephoto lens at a large aperture.

The good news is that theatrically stage lighting is often a lot brighter than you might think... it's just often concentrated on one area within a larger area of darkness. That can allow for faster shutter speeds, lower ISO and smaller apertures than you might think. It just typically varies a lot depending upon the production and in the course of the event, so you may need to time your shots for particular moments.

When I shoot a theatrical production I will try to attend one of the rehearsals in advance to do some test shots and learn more about what lighting is being used. If possible, I'll get on stage to meter the light as accurately as possible with a handheld incident meter, because the reflective meter built into a camera is often fooled by the extreme range of the lighting. But if that's not possible, some sort of spot or partial metering with your camera might be helpful.

Incidentally, the old Vivitar Series 1 manual focus lenses were among the best and most innovative in their day. Vivitar never made any lenses themselves. They outsourced to many different manufacturers who built the lenses to their specifications. At the time when many of their top-of-the-line Series 1 were made, Vivitar used a serial number system that identifies the actual manufacturer. The first two digits of the number indicates who actually built the lens. Some notables included #22xxxxxxxx which is "Kino Precision", who also made their own "Kiron" lenses, many of which have "cult status" today. Kino was started by several ex-Nikkor engineers. The company president once stated that "Kiron is Nikon, spelled sideways." A couple more manufacturers known for their high quality products, #37xxxxxx indicates a Tokina manufactured lens, and lenses made by Perkin-Elmer have a #44xxxxxx serial number. A more complete list of their manufacturer codes can be found at http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Vivitar_serial_numbers.

Even if that 70-210/3.5 Series 1 lens doesn't work out for the theatrical purposes, you might want to hang onto it for other things. If it's in reasonably good shape, $75 is a very good price for it. They often sell for a lot more, particularly when found with a bayonet mount that's still in wide use today and compatible with modern DSLRs (such as Nikon F, Pentax K/A, Olympus OM).

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

Bill_de Loc: US

You are making me feel old ... I guess I am. I had one of those lenses when it was new. At F/5.6 and up they were very sharp. Below that, not so much.

If you are only shooting what is happening on stage you should be fine. The D300 (I have now) is excellent up to ISO 800 and still very good at 1600.

--

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

If you are doing production stills, you can have them hold a pose, so the f-stop is of more interest for DOF than light gathering. If you are taking shots during the show, you probably want to look for (or rent) the 2.8.

RichardTaylor Loc: Sydney, Australia

From personal experience shooting indoor classical music concerts and an opera production I would regard a f2.8 lenses as a starting point, however upou will need to use very high ISO values (3200+).

In the past with, older bodies I used multiple bodies with f2 or faster lenses.
Nowdays with newer bodies that perform OK at ISO 6400 a pair of f2.8 zooms does the trick.

jim quist Loc: Missouri

I have a 70-200 2.8 and have shot a lot of indoor events and stage productions. the 2.8 works fine. Keep looking for a 2.8, it will help keep your ISO down.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

I would think that 3.5 would be pretty slow but I guess that depends on how much movement there is. Theater can be completely still in which case it will probably work as long as you can be still enough. Is that old lens even AF?
A 2.8 is only a 1/2 stop faster, not a lot. I never shoot theater, only dance, and dance moves really fast. I never shoot it slower than 1.8 but need a fast shutter.
Do you have any f4 lenses? Try one. If that works a 3.5 will work slightly better, if it's AF.
I don't consider 2.8 even remotely fast either. Can you find a faster inexpensive prime??
Good luck. ;-)
SS

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Buy it!! It's a collectors item, as the rest of them were 70~210. OK, so you mistyped. I'd say buy it anyway, it's better wide open than you would expect. Good hand-holding technique should make up for the 2/3 stop loss vs an f/2.8 lens. It should balance well on your D300, and as much as I dislike one-touch zooms, I have to admit that they are ideal for manual focus hand-holding.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

If you really want a lens that can gather light, get a 1.4 or 1.8. Try the 85mm f1.8. All I know is that my 50mm f1.8 sucks up light. It beats an f2.8 to smithereens in that regard. An f2.8 is good for fast focusing. It really only gives you one more stop in aperture than your 3.5 which you can gain with ISO. My suggestion, get that 85mm f1.8 for just under $500.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

If you really want a lens that can gather light, get a 1.4 or 1.8. Try the 85mm f1.8. All I know is that my 50mm f1.8 sucks up light. It beats an f2.8 to smithereens in that regard. An f2.8 is good for fast focusing. It really only gives you one more stop in aperture than your 3.5 which you can gain with ISO. My suggestion, get that 85mm f1.8 for just under $500. Also, since it's a prime, you'll be able to crop shots as well.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

For the price, assuming the lens is in good condition, you can't go wrong. I suspect that's not actually a "constant" f/3.5, but f/3.5 is available at any zoom range. Some of the numbers experts can correct me, but I don't think there's even one stop between 3.5 and 2.8. I think it's 2.8 and then 4.0.

Tgbyrne

You asked about light gathering for the lens. Remember a 1 stop difference means that you have half (or in the other direction, twice) the light. As mentioned 3.5 is 2/3 of a stop difference from 2.8. Every stop "faster" is twice the light. F2 is twice the light of 2.8, 1.4 is twice that of 2 ........ Every stop "slower" is half the light.