Vivitar 70 - 210 f3.5 lens

**gordon_l34** · 05-08-2012, 12:29 AM

Hi All,

I have a Vivitar Series 1, 70 - 210 f3.5, S/N 22647009 in poor condition with an M42 mount.
I have been offered the same lens with a Canon FD mount, S/N 22641239, in excellent condition.
Going by the serial numbers they were both made in 1976; the M42 in the 47th week and the FD in the 41st week.
My query is would it be difficult to change the mounts from the M42 lens onto the FD lens and then use the lens with the M42 mount, given that they were both made by Kiron?
Your comments would be greatly appreciated before I buy the one with the FD mount.

Regards.

aurele · 05-08-2012, 01:13 AM

i guess it wouldn't be too difficult.

Check if the screw are at the same place on both mount.

If yes, i think you can unscrew both mount, swap them, re-screw. If there is some slice/ring under mounts, swap them too.

**gordon_l34** · 05-08-2012, 01:31 AM

Originally posted by aurele

i guess it wouldn't be too difficult.

Check if the screw are at the same place on both mount.

If yes, i think you can unscrew both mount, swap them, re-screw. If there is some slice/ring under mounts, swap them too.

Hi,
Yes I have sat them side by side and it would appear that the mounts come off in the same location so to speak.
I am going to take both lens to the camera technician here in Brisbane tomorrow, that I use, and see what he thinks.
Regards.

bdery · 05-08-2012, 05:12 AM

There's a chance that the registration distance (between lens and sensor) is different for both systems, meaning it's possible that you won't be able to form decent images with the Canon version. But if it's only a few screws, you can always revert back to the previous design.

ripit · 05-09-2012, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by bdery

There's a chance that the registration distance (between lens and sensor) is different for both systems, meaning it's possible that you won't be able to form decent images with the Canon version. But if it's only a few screws, you can always revert back to the previous design.

My guess would be it is the same lens and the difference in registration distance is achieved by different thickness mounts. If this is true and you can get the lenses side by side you can compare. On the canon, go off the inner mounting face, not the back of the lock ring and on the pentax go off the mounting face. The canon should be about 3.5mm shorter (not a lot, a bit more than 1/8 inch or more appropriately about .140" but there will be a difference). If thats the way it looks then I would think your chances would be good.

**gordon_l34** · 05-10-2012, 12:10 AM

Hi All,

The conversion will not be taking place as there is about twenty hours work in it owing to the complexity of the lens.
Thanks for the advice anyhow.

Regards.

aurele · 05-10-2012, 01:37 AM

Originally posted by gordon_l34

The conversion will not be taking place as there is about twenty hours work in it owing to the complexity of the lens.

what ? twenty hours ? wtf ?!

I converted the same (OM mount to K) without the appropriate mount : i use a Pentax reverse 49mm adapter PENTAX Reverse Adapter K reviews - Pentax Camera Accessory Review Database.

I had to do some screw hole, polish, find the correct flange, etc ... took me 2 hours. I didn't even have the appropriate screwdriver !

the lens : i had to use a wire to always let the lens @real aperture (so when i turn the aperture ring, the VF become darker of brighter) (gold wire on the bottom right.
i screw the Pentax reverse mount to to lens body.

ripit · 05-10-2012, 03:37 AM

Where did you get the idea it would be a 20 hour job? Oddly enough I also converted mine from om mount and it was the easiest conversion I have ever done (I got lucky and got a donor mount off a different model lens that fit up well). Mine has a few cosmetic issues that I have been too lazy to fix but works fine. I needed a spacer ring (non critical dimensions) to hold the aperture ring down and I temporarily used the white plastic liner from a filter case with a hole cut in it. It works fine but it has that ugly white plastic ring behind the aperture ring. It also has some open space inside the lugs (the original baffle didn't fit). A new baffle wouldn't be too hard to make, but again, it works so I'm too lazy.

I can not see why that job would take anywhere near 20 hours? If the parts fit it should be less than an hour I would think. I wouldn't imagine you would have to tear the whole lens apart unless you have to change out parts that go down by the helix to operate aperture or something?

aurele · 05-10-2012, 06:07 AM

i really suggest you to do it yourself, you know. It's not hard at all.

If your not confident, juste take picture of each stage to be able to rebuild eveything if you decide to go back.

05-08-2012, 12:29 AM	#1
gordon_l34 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 779	Vivitar 70 - 210 f3.5 lens Hi All, I have a Vivitar Series 1, 70 - 210 f3.5, S/N 22647009 in poor condition with an M42 mount. I have been offered the same lens with a Canon FD mount, S/N 22641239, in excellent condition. Going by the serial numbers they were both made in 1976; the M42 in the 47th week and the FD in the 41st week. My query is would it be difficult to change the mounts from the M42 lens onto the FD lens and then use the lens with the M42 mount, given that they were both made by Kiron? Your comments would be greatly appreciated before I buy the one with the FD mount. Regards.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Price DROP Kiron 70-210 zoom lock, Vivitar Series 1 70-210, MIR-1, Jupiter,	alanjoke	Sold Items	23	06-27-2012 09:38 AM
DA 50-200 vs DA 55-300 vs Vivitar S1 70-210 vs Pentax-A 70-210; Tele-Zoom Comparo	PentHassyKon	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	04-28-2010 03:40 PM

05-08-2012, 01:13 AM	#2
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	i guess it wouldn't be too difficult. Check if the screw are at the same place on both mount. If yes, i think you can unscrew both mount, swap them, re-screw. If there is some slice/ring under mounts, swap them too.

05-08-2012, 01:31 AM	#3
gordon_l34 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 779 Original Poster	Originally posted by aurele i guess it wouldn't be too difficult. Check if the screw are at the same place on both mount. If yes, i think you can unscrew both mount, swap them, re-screw. If there is some slice/ring under mounts, swap them too. Hi, Yes I have sat them side by side and it would appear that the mounts come off in the same location so to speak. I am going to take both lens to the camera technician here in Brisbane tomorrow, that I use, and see what he thinks. Regards.

05-08-2012, 05:12 AM	#4
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,362	There's a chance that the registration distance (between lens and sensor) is different for both systems, meaning it's possible that you won't be able to form decent images with the Canon version. But if it's only a few screws, you can always revert back to the previous design.

05-09-2012, 03:27 PM	#5
ripit Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: NewYork Posts: 899	Originally posted by bdery There's a chance that the registration distance (between lens and sensor) is different for both systems, meaning it's possible that you won't be able to form decent images with the Canon version. But if it's only a few screws, you can always revert back to the previous design. My guess would be it is the same lens and the difference in registration distance is achieved by different thickness mounts. If this is true and you can get the lenses side by side you can compare. On the canon, go off the inner mounting face, not the back of the lock ring and on the pentax go off the mounting face. The canon should be about 3.5mm shorter (not a lot, a bit more than 1/8 inch or more appropriately about .140" but there will be a difference). If thats the way it looks then I would think your chances would be good.

05-10-2012, 12:10 AM	#6
gordon_l34 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 779 Original Poster	Hi All, The conversion will not be taking place as there is about twenty hours work in it owing to the complexity of the lens. Thanks for the advice anyhow. Regards.

05-10-2012, 01:37 AM	#7
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	Originally posted by gordon_l34 The conversion will not be taking place as there is about twenty hours work in it owing to the complexity of the lens. what ? twenty hours ? wtf ?! I converted the same (OM mount to K) without the appropriate mount : i use a Pentax reverse 49mm adapter PENTAX Reverse Adapter K reviews - Pentax Camera Accessory Review Database. I had to do some screw hole, polish, find the correct flange, etc ... took me 2 hours. I didn't even have the appropriate screwdriver ! the lens : i had to use a wire to always let the lens @real aperture (so when i turn the aperture ring, the VF become darker of brighter) (gold wire on the bottom right. i screw the Pentax reverse mount to to lens body.

05-10-2012, 03:37 AM	#8
ripit Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: NewYork Posts: 899	Where did you get the idea it would be a 20 hour job? Oddly enough I also converted mine from om mount and it was the easiest conversion I have ever done (I got lucky and got a donor mount off a different model lens that fit up well). Mine has a few cosmetic issues that I have been too lazy to fix but works fine. I needed a spacer ring (non critical dimensions) to hold the aperture ring down and I temporarily used the white plastic liner from a filter case with a hole cut in it. It works fine but it has that ugly white plastic ring behind the aperture ring. It also has some open space inside the lugs (the original baffle didn't fit). A new baffle wouldn't be too hard to make, but again, it works so I'm too lazy. I can not see why that job would take anywhere near 20 hours? If the parts fit it should be less than an hour I would think. I wouldn't imagine you would have to tear the whole lens apart unless you have to change out parts that go down by the helix to operate aperture or something?

05-10-2012, 06:07 AM	#9
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	i really suggest you to do it yourself, you know. It's not hard at all. If your not confident, juste take picture of each stage to be able to rebuild eveything if you decide to go back.