Bridges wrote:
Your post interested me because of something that happened about 25 years ago. At that time, in addition to photography as a hobby, I also collected, traded, and sold cameras. I had some real classics like a Nikon F3HP,Nikon FE, Nikon FA, Minolta SRT101, and 201, several Pentax, Olympus OM1, OM1n, OM2, OM2n, OM3, OM4, OM10, Contax, Minolta, Canon AE1, and two or three other higher level Canons, (never had any Leica equipment though). Anyway, I had about 30 to 40 bodies and about twice that many lenses. A friend of mine that shot Nikon and I decided one day to test which mfg. made the sharpest lenses. At that time I was shooting Olympus. We set up a target (the kind that repair shops use to test lenses. We chose what we thought would be some of the better lenses and fired away. The lens that was the sharpest was a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 -- which is most likely the same lens you are talking about! The next sharpest was the Olympus 75-150. The Olympus was no surprise since their lenses are highly respected throughout the photo world but the Series 1 was a total surprise. I'm not saying it was a better lens than the Contax, Nikon, or Canon lenses. There may have been problems we didn't test for like aberration, pin-cushioning, color correctness etc. Just on the pure sharpness level though, it beat them all. Amazing how sometimes there are little hidden gems out there!
Your post interested me because of something that ... (
show quote)
Great story Bridges! Sometimes we forget how many quality pieces of equipment were made 20 to 30 years ago that lacked the marketing budgets of the big boys and/or because they decided to put that marketing money towards making good quality lenses that met or beat the competition in both quality and price. Thanks for the perspective.