Vivitar 28-200 F3.5-5.6  reviews

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: derekw   review date: November-11-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-200 XR
Sony 18-250

price paid:

9 GBP

positive:

Sharp across the range
Great colour and contrast
Built like a tank
Little distortion

negative:

MFD!!!!
72 mm filters
Heavy

comment:

Outdoor use only - MFD makes indoor use nigh on impossible.

My copy is badged Soligor C/D UCMS and has the Licensed by Minolta engraving. Cosmeticaally identical to the 60-300 except the filter size (both lenses being produced by Koboron).

Very good sharpness throughout once stopped by 2/3rds.

Slightly better than the Tamron but the Sony is incredible for its range.

This is a bargain lens and well worth getting whether on a budget or not.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: matzze   review date: June-13-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony SAL1855
Sony SAL35F18
EXAKTA 72-210 F4.5

price paid:

30 € (used)

positive:

very cheap
nice range (walkaround lens)
very good build
if stopped down good sharpness

negative:

wide open, very bad sharpness
slide zoom
can only focus greater 1,9m distance

comment:

Mine is branded EXAKTA 28-210 F.3.5-5.6 MC. First I was very disappointed about the very bad sharpness and thought even 30 € are too much for it. But then I played around with it a little and have to say, it´s not that bad at all. If you stop down 3 or 4 steps you can get very nice pictures. With nearly excellent results at the sweet spot around 100mm. So my result is very cheap possibility as walkaround lens if you can live with higher isos cause of stopping down and the focus distance of 1,9m. Anyway I watched other pictures of Sony SAL18250 and have to say wide open they are also not very good only the center is sharp and this lens is 16 times more expensive. So as all zooms with that range, if you don't want to change lenses or carry them around stick with the losses, cause you can't avoid them. Here some test shots. http://www.flickr.com/photos/matzze665/

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: javieralbe   review date: October-24-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210 F4 (beercan)
Minolta 35-105 F3.5-4.5 N
Promaster 60-300 F4-5.6

price paid:

50 USD (used)

positive:

Reasonably sharp at all focal lengths
Convenient focal range

negative:

Heavy
Clunky AF
8 ft minimun focus distance
Zoom creep.

comment:

I have the Kalimar version of this lens. I am satisfied that it is identical to the Vivitar reviewed here.
I bought this on eBay based on the previous review by paulevans of 2009. That review is exactly right.
I was hoping that this lens would be as sharp as my Promaster 60-300. (A lens reviewed on this site under the name, cosina 60-300). Unfortunately it wasn't. These two lenses (the 60-300 and the 28-200) were obviously made by the same manufacturer (apparently Koboron) -- they look almost identical. Still, the Kalimar 28-200 is quite sharp when stopped down a couple of stops; it is then as sharp as the Promaster 60-300 and comes within the sharpness range of the beercan. (The beercan is still sharper than both the Promaster 60-300 and the 28-200).
I find the focal range of the 28-200 very convenient, and have started using it as my walkaround lens.
It is quite heavy; perhaps a tiny bit less so than the beercan, but whatever difference in weight is negligeable. Also, the lens creeps. Personally, I find neither the weight nor the zoom creep annoying. What is a bit annoying is the mininum focus distance (2.5 m, approx. 8 feet).

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: paulevans   review date: August-02-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

28-135 f4-4.5
70-210 f4
100-200 f4.5

price paid:

25 GBP

positive:

Decently sharp across the frame at all focal lengths
Built like a tank
Distortion not as bad as other 28-200s

negative:

AF slow and clunky
Large front element makes it susceptible to flare
Won't focus closer than 8ft
Heavy

comment:

Bought this a while back when I was still on film. Recently read that the Koboron manufactured lenses - which this is - weren't actually bad performers. Got this one out and tested and was very surprised how good it is - far better than an old Sigma 28-200 of the short mid-90s variety that I traded in as it was only sharp in the centre of the frame and suffered from very obvious distortion at most settings - this one is much better.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 3 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: petesidewalk   review date: March-25-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

K/M 75-300 Big Beercan
K/M 35-70 4
Sony 18-70 Kit Lens
K/M 50 1.7
K/M 70-210 4.5-5.6
K/M 70-210 4 Beercan
K/M 28 2.8
K/M 28-80xi
K/M 28-135 4-4.5
K/M 35-70 3.5-4.5
Tamron 200-400 5.6 LD NEW
Sigma 75-200 2.8-3.5
Deitz 28-200
Tamron 20-35 3.5-4.5
KM 100-400 4.5-6.7
Tamron 28-75 2.8
KM 50 3.5 Macro
KM 35-105 3.5-4.5
KM 24-105 3.5-4.5
Sigma 18 3.5
Sony 70-400 4-5.6 G
K/M 80-200 2.8 G
K/M 75-300 4.5-5.6 NEW
Tamron 300 2.8 LD IF

price paid:

60.00 USD

positive:

Range
Cheap
Build

negative:

IQ
CA
Weight
sharpness

comment:

I bougth this from a fellow on the alphamaxxum website. The guy sold me a dinged lens, then denied he did it and blamed it on shipping. I had the lens repaired only to find it really is not great but not terrible. The fellow called it "punchier than a beercan" I think that meant it could do more damage if used as a projectile. Not sharp, light and has the slide zoom. I have buyers remorse, ha ha. Thanks