Rangefinders (Fixed Lens)

Vivitar 35ES – A short test and review by Charles Higham

A few months ago I was looking for a small 35mm film rangefinder with a lens featuring a larger than average maximum aperture, ideally with full manual control or at least shutter speed priority for low light photos to avoid blurred shots, and preferably in black. I researched the usual suspects such as the Canon QL17, Olympus 35RC, Yashica GSN, Konica Auto S2 etc, but they cost more than I wanted to pay. I did consider the fab Yashica Lynx 14 with the monster f/1.4 lens, but it’s not exactly pocketable and prices for a good example are escalating. If you are prepared to accept a lens with a maximum aperture smaller than f/2 then there are some nice little rangefinders out there. But I did notice from comments in forums that the Minolta Hi-Matic 7SII with an f/1.7 lens has close cousins in the form of the Revue 400SE and Vivitar 35ES which are more affordable, and if some reviews are to be believed share an identical or very similar lens. Furthermore, some stated it’s likely that the Japanese manufacturer Cosina made all three cameras.

The Vivitar 35ES

I checked out image quality online for both cameras and eventually bought the Vivitar 35ES for £32.00 with original lens cap, case, instructions and box, all in nice condition.  The warranty leaflet has 1/78 printed at the bottom and I’m pretty sure this refers to the year of manufacture. It’s quite a compact metal camera with a reassuring heft, and the five bladed 40mm f/1.7 lens with six elements in four groups and 46mm filter thread looks good.

A bit of maintenance

My first job was to clean the viewfinder which was a little hazy so removed the top cover and gently swabbed the appropriate parts with cotton buds which did the trick. Unfortunately, when reassembling I over-tightened the cap over the film winder lever and it sheared off from the small threaded shaft which keeps the lever correctly aligned and in place.  I had to bodge a repair using a screw, but it does still work and it’s not that obvious.

I also had to renew the light seals as they were in a poor state, so if you buy this model expect to need to do the same. I managed it with no problems using Jon Goodman’s excellent instructions

The Vivitar 35ES viewfinder

I’ve attempted to show what you see through the viewfinder of the Vivitar 35ES and you’ll note that part of the lens intrudes, which isn’t ideal but I can live with it. The needle aperture indicator display on the right is well marked.

P1140683

The Light meter

Fitted with a PX675 type battery, the meter needle was responsive and the yellow-tinted rangefinder patch was clear and useable. The Vivitar 35ES does require a battery to meter and automatically adjust aperture, and the instruction manual states EV range is EV4.5 (f/1.7 at 1/8 second) to EV17 (f16 at1/500) with ASA100 film. Although the camera shutter can operate without power I believe it does so at the smallest aperture of f/16, so decent exposures could be a problem if the battery dies on you. The CdS light sensor is at the top of the lens and within the filter ring so metering should remain correct with filter attached. ASA speeds from 25 to 800 are adjusted with a notched lever under the lens which you have to press down firmly to move and is unlikely to be accidentally shifted.

Shooting with Vivitar 35ES

Focusing the Vivitar 35ES is assisted by a lever on the side of the lens which moves smoothly in an arc of about 2.5cm, and minimum subject distance is just under 1 meter. Available shutter speeds are B, 1/8, 15, 30, 60, 125, 250 and 500. A nice touch is that the B setting is locked out unless you press a small silver tab on the lens.

There’s a self-timer which worked fine when I tested it, but this model is over 35 years old and I’m wary of using it in case it suddenly decides to stop mid-cycle and cause a problem. The adjustable ring closest to the body is marked with GN numbers and is a flash compensation system, but I’m not intending to try it as I prefer natural light photography. On this point, because there’s no moving mirror causing vibration I felt comfortable shooting at speeds as low as 1/15 second, which is one of the great advantages of using a rangefinder. The shutter button also has a cable release thread which is handy for longer exposures. The shutter is quiet too.

Advertisement

Concluding thoughts

Overall, the Vivitar 35ES is a pleasing little rangefinder you can just about fit in a jacket pocket (although it is quite heavy so it’ll be a lopsided jacket), and the f/1.7 lens makes it particularly suitable for lower light conditions such as interiors.

So was buying the Vivitar 35ES a back door to quality optics on a well-made body at a lower price? The camera seems robust, well-designed and operation is straightforward enough so it’s quick to use. I’m generally happy with lens sharpness and although you can’t manually adjust aperture I’ve really appreciated that opening up to f/1.7 is available to the metering system when needed. In short, if you are looking for a good quality smallish rangefinder with a nice bright lens at a reasonable price then this Vivitar 35ES is a candidate worth considering.

So far I’ve only shot two rolls of Ilford HP5 with a yellow filter but at some point I’ll use Kodak Portra or Ektar to see how the lens renders colour. Here are a selection of photos processed by Peak Imaging and Snappy Snaps (Oxford) and negatives scanned using an Epson V370.

 

img235

img128

img125

img220

img221

img224

img231

img223


Show your support for 35mmc – A message from Hamish

If you found this post interesting or useful, or if it helped you make up your mind about buying one of these cameras, then why not


 
By clicking that link, as long as you buy, bid on or win an auction within 24hrs – at no extra cost to you – I will receive a little kick back from ebay to help keep 35mmc up and running.

Additionally, if you would like to contribute a post of your own to 35mmc, click here!

Thanks,

Hamish

Do you enjoy reading 35mmc?

For as little as $1 a month, you can help support the upkeep of this website. The more people chuck me a small amount of cash each month, the more time I can spend building and improving upon it - simple as that!
Or, for $2 a month you can get access to my behind the scenes micro-blog over on Patreon!

Either way, want to help out, become a patron of 35mmc here:

Become a Patron!

Alternatively, if you just enjoyed this post, or like the odd post here and there, please feel free to chuck a few pennies in the tip jar via Ko fi here:


Write for 35mmc: read more here, about how you can help build upon this ever growing resource
Subscribe/Follow: click here, to discover all the ways you can follow 35mmc

You Might Also Like

10 Comments

  • Avatar
    Reply
    Erik Prestmo
    May 21, 2016 at 1:15 pm

    I have a queezy feeling about the pictures shown in this blog.
    I develop ALL my films myself, and scan them, nowadays as soon as possible, and I’m also in the process of scanning 1000’s of my own negatives and negatives and pictures from others, as part of a local historical society.

    My question is : Why is it that all pictures shown in this blog has been cleaned so thoroughly in Photoshop or similar software?
    I can se few of the normal blemishes, dust, hair and scanner artifacts that I see in my raw scans all the time.

    It is impossible to say much about this or that cameras qualities if all we see is software output from a drawing program…….

    • Avatar
      Reply
      Charles Higham
      May 21, 2016 at 3:21 pm

      Hi Erik, I’m not sure if you are referring specifically to the photos in this post, or all the photos shown on this 35mmc blog. Personally, I don’t have Photoshop or any advanced editing programme. I just use the photo editing software that comes with Windows 8, and while fairly basic it’s ideal for my limited needs.

      Regarding the photos above I have removed most of the more prominent dust and hair blemishes you mention (glad to say there weren’t many on my batch of negatives), and in some cases (but not all) adjusted contrast and highlights a little. And that’s it. I don’t adjust sharpness or ask the software to apply any enhancements, or preset looks of any description. So what you see is representative of the camera’s capabilities and the competence or otherwise of the processing lab in relation to the negatives. And of course how good the scanner is.

      I would have to disagree that it’s impossible to say much about a particular camera’s qualities given the very limited adjustments mentioned above, but when it comes to really major editing alterations to images using something like Photoshop then your comment is not unreasonable. If you are processing hundreds of photos for your local historical society – which sounds a very useful, helpful and indeed valuable thing to do – then if you haven’t done so already I would suggest checking out what sort of automatic dust and hair removal capabilities your scanner has for batch processing as this could save you a lot of time. Hope this response helps.

    • Avatar
      Reply
      Hamish
      May 21, 2016 at 6:51 pm

      Eric, it’s very hard to judge anything from film photos online. Even before an image has been run through photoshop or any editing program the simple process of scanning can have a large effect on the result. Even comparing photos that have been taken on exactly the same kit and scanned with the same scanner by different people could be very different depending on the process the person who does the scanning applies.
      The same could also be said for two people printing from the same negative in the darkroom though.
      By this merit, no photo in any review can be that useful.
      That said, when I look at photos taken by other people I look for clues and common traits that are visible from one photo to the next. It’s not an exact sience but it does help paint a bit of a picture.
      If you are interested in this camera for example – look at these images, look at those in galleries on Flickr etc and see what correlates. That’s what I do at least… Though ultimately, the real test is shooting the camera yourself.

  • Avatar
    Reply
    Giorgio
    May 22, 2016 at 11:08 pm

    Nice camera and nice article. I made a review of the sister Revue 400 SE.
    Have a look if you want to!

    https://itsalwaysluck.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/street-review-the-revue-400-se-vivitar-35es-prinz-35er-minolta-hi-matic-7sii-konica-auto-s3/

    • Avatar
      Reply
      Charles Higham
      May 23, 2016 at 7:02 am

      Thanks Giorgio. You’ve got some good and stylish street photo portraits in your article.

  • Avatar
    Reply
    Russ
    May 20, 2018 at 1:24 am

    Yes, the Vivitar ES shares the same lens as the Hi-Magic 7sII and the Revue. It is a VERY good and sharp lens. The lens was a design collaboration between Minolta and Leitz. Mine delivers superb results. Better than my Oly RC and Canon QL-17 GIII. A very nice camera. Yes, they were assembled by Cosina.

  • Avatar
    Reply
    Charles Higham
    May 20, 2018 at 7:36 am

    Russ, I agree it’s well worth having. However, I picked the camera up again recently and installed a new battery, and while the aperture needle is responsive the aperture blades are resolutely not opening up. It’s a known issue and needs a repair which I’ve seen online.

    • Avatar
      Reply
      John French
      August 26, 2019 at 2:19 am

      Interesting, mine’s got the same issue. Bought it from a street vendor in Hong Kong for ~$20USD and only managed to get one roll out of it, but in that roll was a shot I liked enough to print and hang on my wall. It would be nice to get it working again as I do love the quality of the lens. Do you have any more information about the necessary repair?

    Leave a Reply

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Pin It on Pinterest

    Share This

    Thank you for commenting

    ...now share the post with your friends?