Chinon Lens Serial Number

Chinon CG-5 35mm film camera complete with auto chinon 50mm lens, serial number 289143 made in japan circa 1980's with strap v.good cond CollectableCameras. From shop CollectableCameras. 5 out of 5 stars (13) 13 reviews. Favourite Add to. I have two copies of the Auto Chinon 135/2.8 lens, apparently made by Tomioka. Yes, my two copies do not look completely like the photo above. The focus grip is made by a rather week crocodile leatherlike plastic that shrinks often (I have the same on my Auto Chinon Tomioka 55/1.4 with the Tomioka label in the front filter ring).



Third-Party Pentax Lenses - Reviews and Database » Miscellaneous Lenses » Prime Lenses

Sharpness
Aberrations
Bokeh
Handling
Value
ReviewsViewsDate of last review
981,775Mon February 24, 2020
Recommended ByAverage PriceAverage User Rating
100% of reviewers$47.138.44



supersize

supersize

supersize

Description:
Max Aperture: F2.8
Min Aperture: F22
Min Focus: 150cm
Filter Thread: 52cm
Mount Type:
Price History:


Author:
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Ascending) Showing Reviews 1-9 of 9

Registered: April, 2009
Posts: 111
Lens Review Date: May 8, 2010I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: None indicated | Rating: 6

Pros:nice focal length, it was free
Cons:purple fringing

I originally had an older M42 version of this lens, but traded with a friend and got this version instead. It's quite sharp, even wide open (well, sharp enough for me) and the focal length is great for street portraits - but it does have quite bad PF in some cases.
The aperture can only be changed in full stops. The built-in hood is about 1/2'.
A 135mm prime is nice to have, and this one can probably be found quite cheap.

Registered: January, 2010
Posts: 16
Lens Review Date: March 13, 2011I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $45.00 | Rating: 8

Pros:Well made, sharp when stopped down
Cons:very soft wide open

I really didn't appreciate this lens until recently. It is a little beauty for portraits. It is really quite soft wide open, but when you use it for portraits the effect is lovely. Creates a warmth that I can't seem to artificially create it.
The CA is bad in high contrast situations and if you are shooting towards a light source, but if you keep the hood on, and avoid shooting into the light it is ok. Considering how cheaply you can pick this lens up I would recommend it.

Registered: November, 2010
Posts: 2,223
Lens Review Date: March 4, 2012I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $80.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:Sharp, great IQ, solid built, AF, fast, beautiful, unbelievable IQ
Cons:None, I do not find any CA
Sharpness:10Aberrations:10Bokeh:10Handling:10Value:10

I have two copies of the Auto Chinon 135/2.8 lens, apparently made by Tomioka. Yes, my two copies do not look completely like the photo above. The focus grip is made by a rather week crocodile leatherlike plastic that shrinks often (I have the same on my Auto Chinon Tomioka 55/1.4 with the Tomioka label in the front filter ring). The curious thing is that the first one I got had a legend MADE IN KOREA, which told me that I may not have been made by Tomioka. Then I got another exact copy on Ebay with the legend MADE IN JAPAN. Both are exactly the same in quality and sharpness. Below are some pics taken with boths. This lens is as good as the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonar 135/35. No bad shots.
-------------------
These are from the Japanese version copy:
Auto Chinon 135/2.8 Japon Version by Palenquero, on Flickr
Auto Chinon 135/2.8 Japon Version by Palenquero, on Flickr
AutoChinonTOmioka135mmf2.8vJapan@f4-Candle-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
AutoChinonTOmioka135mmf2.8vJapan@f2.5-Candle-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
These are from the Korean version copy:
Sailing Ship at the Dana Harbour by Palenquero, on Flickr
AutoChinon135mmf2.8-Arabesco-1 by Palenquero, on Flickr
Auto Chinon 135/2.8 Korea Version by Palenquero, on Flickr
Auto Chinon 135/2.8 Korea Version by Palenquero, on Flickr

Registered: September, 2012
Posts: 45
Lens Review Date: November 2, 2012I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $30.00 | Rating: 7

Pros:Nice (if potentially colorful) bokeh, very clear
Cons:Average sharpness, heavy longitudinal CA / fringing
Sharpness:6Aberrations:6Bokeh:8Handling:8Value:8

I have an AGFA-branded OEM version, with the characteristic Chinon OEM rubber grip (same style shared by AGFA MC 28mm 2.8 and Auto Revuenon MC 50mm 1.4, plus the Chinon version of the Auto Revuenon MC 135mm 2.8). This lens performs much the same as its RMC Tokina counterpart from the same time (~1980); both appear to employ 4 elements in 4 groups (apart from sharing a rounded 6-blade aperture and 52mm filter thread). The Chinon appears to be only marginally less well-built, but unlike the Tokina, its focusing runs in the same direction as for Pentax lenses. (Which is why I tend to prefer it, no kidding.)
There's even more longitudinal CA and associated fringing wide open (and it wasn't weak in the Tokina), but in return there is a fraction less green tint, though both rank among my clearest lenses. Contrast is somewhat better, too, apparently due to better-performing internal blackening. Sharpness is pretty average for both; at least it's fairly even across the APS-C frame. (Modern-day telezooms tend to be equally good or even better.) There is a bit of lateral CA, though it's not too bad.
Bokeh seems pretty nice though, which makes sense considering that 135s tended to be common portrait teles.
Sounds pretty negative? Well, try finding an old 135 that's better without costing an arm and a leg - this one seems to be pretty typical for 'generic' ones of the time. The Pentax-M 135/3.5 obviously weighs much less (270g vs. 390g) but is no sharper in real life, and the K 135/2.5 isn't sharper either from what I've seen. It would take at least an A 135/2.8 (or its Takumar Bayonet cousin), preferably an F 135/2.8 for a noteworthy improvement. Better-performing old 135s do seem to exist, but generally aren't easily adapted to Pentax.

Registered: June, 2013
Posts: 1,458
Lens Review Date: June 18, 2013I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $80.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:super clarity, beautiful bokeh, sweet design
Cons:some violet vignetting when shooting against bright white light
Sharpness:9Aberrations:9Bokeh:10Handling:10Value:10Camera Used:k5&k3

I am amazed by this lens, as I am amazed by the few reviews that don't get it. Even if this wasn't a bargain for the price, I would recommend it, The photos never stop amazing me. OK, its definitely not a walk around, but what 135mm prime would be. The quality and detail of the design and the glass, is very impressive, but the sharpness, really sets it off. Do yourself a favor, if you see it around, grab it. I am super glad I did!

Registered: May, 2010
Posts: 5,900
Lens Review Date: June 19, 2015I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $20.00 | Rating: 9

Pros:Very Sharp, Lovely Color Rendition
Cons:Weighs A Ton!
Sharpness:10Aberrations:2Bokeh:8Handling:7Value:10Camera Used:K5II

The only reason I would not make this a 10 is because it's a bit difficult to hand hold and MF. I put this lens in this category because it's a variant on this lens, HOWEVER, from what I've seen my copy which is GAF branded and which came with a GAF/Chinon, SLR is a much larger lens than the later versions which have more plastic.
It's a bit of a beast this lens, all metal, heavy, well made, hard to hold. It has the leatherette on the focusing ring and it does not say multicoated at all so I am figuring it has to be an earlier variant on this lens. I've never seen another one of these labeled with GAF in a red box actually branded like this as on the GAF cameras. It does say 'Made In Japan' but I do get the impression it just might be a better lens than those that followed. From the reviews I've read I'd definitely have to say it's a sharper lens for sure. It's definitely a near 10 lens.
The bokeh is fine, slightly on the creamy side, at least in the pics I've taken so far. The color rendition is really, really nice. Like my similarly built Chinon 55 it's got very nice color, not too saturated, just right. I think the reds and greens are particularly well done. They seem very faithful to the objects I've photographed with it.
I was surprised actually by this lens. I did not expect the lens to be this sharp given the reviews I've read. Either this is a different lens from the ones that they made later for K mount or this one is an exceptionally good copy because I cannot see this lens as an '8' at all. It's a bit of a trade off because of the weight. I will likely need to use the tripod with this one a lot. On the K5II it's just too heavy for me to use it for long without one, but in terms of the quality of the lens I think it's worth it. I haven't tried it for portraits yet, but I have a feeling it will be a nice lens for that, very flattering. I think this lens just may have a bit of the pixie dust thing going on..
More later when I am done testing it out. I'll have to take some good pics of the lens too so you can see what I mean..

Registered: March, 2015
Posts: 21
Lens Review Date: March 11, 2017I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $52.00 | Rating: 8

Pros:bokeh, build-quality
Cons:aberrations, to some degree
Sharpness:8Aberrations:6Bokeh:8Handling:6Value:10Camera Used:K-5, K2

I bought this one used in a camera store, in almost mint condition. It is an Agfa-branded K-mount version, named AGFA COLOR MULTI-COATED 1:2.8 f=135mm ⌀52mm. I mainly bought it for shooting film, as a more compact alternative for my much bulkier F 100mm macro (sometimes space is an issue). I haven't finished the roll in my K2 yet, but I made a bunch of test-shots on the K-5 today.
Construction & handling
From what I can see without taking it apart, the over-all build quality is excellent; not far away from a Takumar. It has a built-in metal hood that easily slides along the barrel (but doesn't lock in place in any position).
  • Aperture and focus ring turn in the same direction as a normal Pentax lens
  • The focus ring turns about 200°, with the first 180° covering the range from MFD (1.5m) to about 10m/30ft. I don't find it particularly hard to judge focus, at least at medium distances.
  • The focus ring runs smoothly, but requires a bit more force than I'd like. If my M 50/1.7 runs 'buttery smooth', this one is still butter, but has been lying in the fridge for quite a while. But as my copy obviously hasn't seen much use before, it's quite possible that it'll loosen up a bit over time.
  • The focus ring is pretty wide, but I would wish it would extend a bit more further away from the camera. It's a bit awkward to hold/focus for me compared to, say, the D FA 100mm WR or its F version.
  • The aperture ring has clicks for full stops only.
  • It has 6 slightly rounded aperture blades
  • No A-position on the aperture ring, so need for green-button metering on DSLRs

Sharpness
I haven't made any directcomparisons against other lenses yet, but so far I'm very pleased with it. It isn't terrible wide open, gets noticeably better at F4 and is plenty sharp from F5.6 across the frame (at least on APS-C). Much better than expected, actually.

Aberrations
I was able to provoke pretty bad purple fringing wide open, but under normal shooting conditions it actually seems to be quite well-controlled. It also gets much better from F4 and what remains can be easily cleaned up with the defringe tool in Rawtherapee.
Bokeh
I'm certainly not a Bokeh-Connaisseur, but OOF backgrounds look very nice to me. Specular highlight are only completely round at F2.8, but due to the rounded aperture blades it takes a lot of stopping down to turn them into actual hexagons (up until about F8 they're more like Reuleaux hexagons).
Over all, I like it very much so far. Chances seem good for it to replace the F 100mm as the default short tele in my walk around film kit (but not as a macro lens, of course).

Registered: April, 2017
Posts: 9
Lens Review Date: January 11, 2019I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $55.00 | Rating: 9

Pros:sharp, better than the Pentax cousins
Cons:a bit heavy, a bit stiff, obviously.. the M42 screw
Sharpness:9Aberrations:8Bokeh:9Handling:8Value:10Camera Used:Pentax K50, Fujifilm XT-20

This Auto-Chinon 135mm f/2.8 was a nice surprise. It slightly beats the Pentax-A 135mm f/2.8 (a nice lens, too), but given my dislike for screws I would still recommend the Pentax-A.
I understand that there are variants of this item; mine is in excellent conditions and doesn't suffer from the issues I see reported in the forum by others.
Here, I posted a non-scientific comparison of the AutoChinon vs the Pentax-A 135/2.8 (M42 screw) and the Pentax-M 135/3,5 (sorry for the crop images do not tell the whole story beacuse thay are automatically generated):
http://www.rustichelli.net/Hobbies/Photography/LensTests/legacy-135mm-on-24M..enses-test.php
UPDATE: I also tried the PK-bajonet variant of the same lens, in mint conditions. Definitely recommended, just as the M42 item.
With better light and some experience with the lens, though, I noticed some scarce flare resistance and more fringing, so I lowered to 8 the mark for aberrations.
The lens remains highly recommended!

Registered: December, 2019
Posts: 6
Lens Review Date: February 24, 2020I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $15.00 | Rating: 9

Pros:Sharp, great images
Cons:Some CA, not AF
Sharpness:9Aberrations:6Bokeh:9Handling:9Value:10Camera Used:K-30

Yes, some chromatic abberations, but what lovely images can produce this lens, not only for the price! It is easy to use and if would be with autofocus it would be awesome!
I have the PK mount, and all I can say that if you find one, go get it!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:01 AM.

A multi-sourced collection of everything currently known about Viviar serial numbers.

Introduction

This list should not be considered definitive. Traditional chinese fonts for mac. It is actively changing in response to ongoing research. Vivitar never published any public documentation of their serial numbering system. The information presented here is the result of individual research by lens collectors. Many variants of this list can be found online, sometimes with unsubstantiated claims the list was provided by Vivitar insiders. The sources used in assembling this list are cited as used but not all should be considered authoritative.

There are many documented exceptions to the numbering system presented here, especially in lenses with very early or unusual badging (e.g. 'P&B Vivitar' or 'Vivitar Professional') and in lenses sold late in the history of Vivitar. The consensus seems to be that most lenses sold in the 1960s did not use this system. The first lenses that appear to follow this number scheme appear in the late 1960s and by 1970 it appears to be used consistently. There is general agreement among collectors that sometime after 1990, this system fell into disuse or was completely abandoned.

Steevithak is actively researching this topic and frequently updates this page. He is interested in communicating with anyone who worked for Ponder and Best, particularly in a procurement position.

Serial number lookup

Serial Number System

The most common hypothesis about how the Vivitar serial number system worked involves breaking the serial number down into separate components that represent the manufacturer, year, week, and sequence number. Under this scheme the first two digits of the serial number identify the manufacturer. The third digit represents the last digit of the year of manufacture (e.g. a '4' could mean 1974 or 1984). The fourth and fifth digits represent the week number of manufacture. The remaining digits would be the actual manufacturing sequence number. There are known exceptions to the year/month portion of the formula as well as exceptions to the entire system.

Serial Number Prefix Codes

  • 09 (or 9) Cosina Company, Ltd.[1][2]
  • 13 Schneider Kreuznach[1][2]
  • 22 Kino Precision[1][2]
  • 25 Ozone Optical Co., Ltd.[1][2]
  • 28 Komine Co., Ltd.[1][2][3]
  • 32 Makina Optical Co., Ltd[1][2]
  • 33 Asanuma & Co., Ltd[1][2]
  • 37 Tokina Optical Company, Ltd[1][2][4]
  • 42 Bauer [1][2] (possibly Bauer trademark holder Robert Bosch GmbH)[5]
  • 44 Perkin-Elmer[1][2]
  • 47 Chinon Industries, Inc.[1][2]
  • 51 Tokyo Trading [1][2] (possibly a corruption of Tokyo Koki, a Tokina predecessor)[4]
  • 56 Kyoei Shoji Company, Ltd.[1][2]
  • 61 Samyang Optics Co., Ltd[1]
  • 75 Hoya Corporation[1][2]
  • 77 Kobori Mfg Co. Ltd[1]
  • 81 Polar [1][2]

Prototype Serial Numbers

Prototypes lenses generally used the same serial number scheme as production lenses but will have very low numbers in the portion of the number that reflects the manufacturing sequence. In many cases prototype lenses never made it to production; for example the Vivitar Professional 180mm f/2.8. In other cases the lenses were produced and sold but with slight mechanical or visual differences in the higher numbered production versions. Bill Swinyard describes an example of a prototype lens he owns: Doom 3 resurrection of evil final boss.

LensCross

'I still have one of the prototypes that later went into production. Mine is a Vivitar 20mm f/4 with a black alloy mount, while the production version was labelled as an f/3.8 and had a stainless mount. It has a SN of 22970003. The 0003 indicates only that it is a very early model, although there were a dozen or so of such prototypes made. I also remember having given away prototype models of a Vivitar 100mm f/2.8, an 85mm f/1.8, and an 800mm f/8.'[4] (photos of Bill Swinyard's prototype can be seen in the article: Vivitar Auto Wide-Angle 20mm f/3.8)

Frequently Asked Questions

No direct evidence to date confirms that Vivitar used the serial number system presented above. But, within certain years, this list may be helpful as one tool among many to help determine who made a given lens. This list has been reviewed by two Ponder and Best employees and has been checked against a wide range of historical information but there are likely still errors and omissions.

Bill Swinyard was the Product Manager from 1969 through 1971 at Ponder and Best. He was involved in new product development, marketing, sales, and dealer communication. He has examined this list and made these comments:

'I don't know that P&B had direct input into designating the serial numbers. That wasn't my department; someone in P&B procurement might have known. In any case, we never used lens serial numbers as any marketing or inventory identifiers. They were only referred to by name; remember this all pre-dates the bar-code SKU systems in use today.'[6]

Gordon Lewis, who worked at Vivitar in the 1970s and 1980s, was a Vivitar Product Specialist, handled consumer relations for Olympus OM products, and authored many Vivitar instruction manuals, lends some credence to the use of a serial numbering system:

'I don't know [that serial numbers represented manufacturers] for a fact but I can't imagine them not having manufacturer codes in the product serial numbers. As you know, Vivitar was primarily a marketing and distribution company, so if only for the sake of inventory management and quality assurance it would need to know which manufacturers were supplying which lenses, cameras, flashes, etc. I designed the product codes for Kiron and although in our case there was only one manufacturer (Kino), the numbering was by no means arbitrary.'[7]

Bill Swinyard confirms that Olympus did not make any Vivitar-branded lenses:

'Olympus most certainly did not make any Vivitar-branded lenses. When I was there, Olympus was very protective of its brand and didn't do any distributor-branding at all. It was the most independent of all our suppliers and never listened to us nor sought any of our input about anything. During the last few months of my stay at Vivitar, Olympus had announced that it was going to drop us and go to independent distribution, so I know it didn't happen after I left, either.'[4]

Komine is commonly accepted as the name of a Vivitar lens manufacturer but almost nothing is known about the company. There are two commonly made assertions by Vivitar researchers about who Komine was. The first possibility, and the one supported by this document, is that Komine referes to Komine Co., Ltd, an obscure Japanese manufacturer known to have made interchangeable lenses. The second common hypothesis is that Komine was a corruption of Kominar, a brandname used by Japanese lens manufacturer Nittō Kōgaku. No evidence has yet been found to connect Nitto Kogaku with Ponder & Best and one P&B employee has confirmed that the manufacturer was actually called 'Komine', not Kominar, so this latter idea seems very unlikely. Attempts to contact Nittō Kōgaku and inquire about their relationship to Ponder & Best or their knowledge of the Komine name have been unsuccessful to date.

One complication that has hindered researchers is that Komine is a common Japanese surname. Many existing and defunct companies in Japan have used variations of the name Komine. Bill Swinyard, who left Ponder & Best in 1971 said Komine was not a manufacturer of any Vivitar lenses during his time at the company but recalls seeing Komine or a similar name associated with sample lenses received from a Japanese company during his last months at P&B.[4]Gordon Lewis, who worked at Vivitar during the late 1970s and early 1980s, offered this comment on Komine:

'I do recall that several popular Vivitar lenses were sourced from a Japanese company called Komine. Who knows what they've morphed into now? Keep in mind that the situation in Japan back then was not much different from the situation in China now: There were a lot of shops cranking out practically identical equipment under a variety of names for a variety of distributors.'[8]

Serial Number Check

The most authoritative reference found to date is in the August 1984 issue of Modern Photography, which states that the full name of the company is 'Komine Co., Ltd'[3]. This article was written with the cooperation of Vivitar employees at the time that Komine-made lenses were being manufactured so it's likely to be accurate.

Chinon Lens Serial Number Lookup

References

  1. 1.001.011.021.031.041.051.061.071.081.091.101.111.121.131.141.151.16Vivitar Serial Number List - Matt's Classic Cameras
  2. 2.002.012.022.032.042.052.062.072.082.092.102.112.122.132.14Robert's Tech Media - Deciphering Vivitar Serial Numbers
  3. 3.03.1Good grief! Three Series 1 70-210 Vivitar zooms???, Modern Photography, Aug 1984, p35
  4. 4.04.14.24.34.4personal correspondence between Bill Swinyard and Steve Rainwater, 21 Feb, 2012
  5. [Bauer trademark filing by Robert Bosch GmbH
  6. personal correspondence between Bill Swinyard and Steve Rainwater, 17 Feb, 2012
  7. personal correspondence between Gordon Lewis and Steve Rainwater, 14 Feb, 2012
  8. personal correspondence between Gordon Lewis and Steve Rainwater, 28 Feb, 2012

Links

Chinon Lens Serial Number Lookup

Retrieved from 'http://camera-wiki.org/index.php?title=Vivitar_serial_numbers&oldid=181145'