[Stupot1]

I have always been a big fan of SMC-M lenses, but is the 100mm f4 macro capable of delivering image quality comparable or close to Vivitar Series 1 macro (either version) or Kiron 105mm?

[bluestringer]

I think it delivers outstanding image quality, but I don't have any experience with the Vivitar.

[rbefly]

Hello Stupot1, Welcome to the Forum!
I don't have either Vivitar or the Kiron, but I've seen lots of photos, they're all over the web.
However, I've owned my Pentax M 100mm f/4.0 Macro for some time now and have shot hundreds of macro photos with it.
The main difference I see is in the bokeh. There's a reason the Viv S-1 is called the "Bokina". It is absolutely awe-inspiring, the way the lens renders the OOF highlights. "Dreamlike" is the word that comes to mind.
Aside from that, I'd put the M 100mm up against virtually any Macro tele, even ones costing several times more. For sharpness, color fidelity, I.Q. and rendering, it is equal to most good macros, or very nearly so.
Put another way, there's no $100.00 (USD) macro that comes close. If you want to spend more, you'll find an equal. If you spend considerably more, you will be rewarded with somewhat better bokeh.
If you want the convenience of A/F, auto-aperture and perhaps a lighter lens, again it will cost much more. JMO.
Here's a couple examples;
Good luck!
Ron

[yusuf]

I have A version of it (A100/4). Although I only used it once to test it after I purchased, it's very sharp and bokeh is pretty smooth too.

[bhairavp]

Hello Stupot1, Welcome to the Forum!
I don't have either Vivitar or the Kiron, but I've seen lots of photos, they're all over the web.
However, I've owned my Pentax M 100mm f/4.0 Macro for some time now and have shot hundreds of macro photos with it.
The main difference I see is in the bokeh. There's a reason the Viv S-1 is called the "Bokina". It is absolutely awe-inspiring, the way the lens renders the OOF highlights. "Dreamlike" is the word that comes to mind.
Aside from that, I'd put the M 100mm up against virtually any Macro tele, even ones costing several times more. For sharpness, color fidelity, I.Q. and rendering, it is equal to most good macros, or very nearly so.
Put another way, there's no $100.00 (USD) macro that comes close. If you want to spend more, you'll find an equal. If you spend considerably more, you will be rewarded with somewhat better bokeh.
If you want the convenience of A/F, auto-aperture and perhaps a lighter lens, again it will cost much more. JMO.
Here's a couple examples;
Good luck!
Ron

Isn't the Bokina the Tokina 90 f2.5?
I have the M Macro, and think it is a wonderful lens

[rbefly]

Hello Bhairavp,
Yes, the Vivitar Series 1 90mm f/2.5 VMC Macro was manufactured by Tokina (to be sold under the Vivitar name) until it was discontinued. Then Tokina came out with a very similar Macro lens (some say exactly the same optical formula) under the Tokina name. Both are called the "Bokina". Apparently there are more Vivitars around, but both are highly prized.
http://www.pbase.com/piotreks/vivitar90
http://makingnottaking.blogspot.com/2010/05/tokina-90mm-f25-at-x-macro-bokina.html
Ron

[GeneV]

The 100mm M was a staple of my film days. I used it both for macro and as a short tele. Very sharp.

[Stupot1]

Thanks for all the input and the great shots. I have bought one and I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

[Lowell Goudge]

Just as an aside, except for the filter diameter of the K100/4 macro, the optical formula has not changed since the I believe the super takumar through to at least the M100/4