Group: Moderator
Post: 1,892 (503 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Oct 31, 2015 23:29:10 GMT
Posted: Oct 31, 2015 23:29:10 GMT
What general criteria should be considered to assign ratings to lenses? Alex, given your long and illustrious history on Yashica forums/fora perhaps you have some suggestions?
For what it's worth, I usually rank lenses according to 4 criteria: sharpness, contrast, bokeh, build quality. I suppose we could also add a further criterion of value for money as some lenses cost a lot more than the quality they deliver (e.g. Zeiss Sonnar 135 f3.5) and it's pretty easy to find prices these days.
If it was only possible, I'd love to add one further criterion but it's too subjective to risk and that would be for 'photographic quality'. Some lenses, like Zeiss' 28 f2, make images that are almost 3D in quality and these special characteristics are worthy of mention. Perhaps rather than rate such ethereal qualities, we could simply add a defining comment to the series of ratings for each lens.
Over to your goodself Alex for your thoughts...
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on Nov 1, 2015 1:14:25 GMT
Posted: Nov 1, 2015 1:14:25 GMT
What general criteria should be considered to assign ratings to lenses? That is interesting point. Beside the quality rating, how can we rate a lens's value? For the ones available or rarely appeared on the market we can have an idea. But, for example an 70-210 f4, what should be his value? No any actual reference price. Also, i want to mention something else here. In my last 2 years i became a kind of Yashica ML scanner over the virtual markets. I see a lot of buyers of old manual lenses, quality ones including Yashica, that are from China and Korea. I don't know if there is a new phenomenon for the healthy Chinese to collect them. A lot of old stuff is going in China and that interesting. Some examples, the 24mm became rare and at least doubled the price in last 2 years, ml 100 they are almost disappear, the ml 300 who was easy to find 2 years ago, now....only one over ALL eBay sites. If things are going in this direction, in another 2-3 years we will not be able to find a banal 50 1.7. |
|
Group: Member
Post: 44 (1 liked)
Join date: April 2015
Status:
|
|
on Nov 5, 2015 23:21:35 GMT
Posted: Nov 5, 2015 23:21:35 GMT
What general criteria should be considered to assign ratings to lenses?
For what it's worth, I usually rank lenses according to 4 criteria: sharpness, contrast, bokeh, build quality. I suppose we could also add a further criterion of value for money as some lenses cost a lot more than the quality they deliver (e.g. Zeiss Sonnar 135 f3.5) and it's pretty easy to find prices these days.
If it was only possible, I'd love to add one further criterion but it's too subjective to risk and that would be for 'photographic quality'. Some lenses, like Zeiss' 28 f2, make images that are almost 3D in quality and these special characteristics are worthy of mention. Perhaps rather than rate such ethereal qualities, we could simply add a defining comment to the series of ratings for each lens.
These are pretty much the criteria I had in mind. There are more objective technical standards available, like MTF ratings, though how useful these are may be open to debate. I'd also like to see some indications of colour balance', especially when a Yashica lens can be compared to a close cousin in the Zeiss range. There used to be a table of Y lenses created by Cees de Groot, and although he's dropped out of the scene, there are copies of his listings floating around. His ratings however were incomplete. The value for money criterion is always going to be tricky. My 21mm ML has trebled or quadrupled in price since I bought it, and the 24mm ML has gone the same way. And I've seen my 70-210 go for half what I paid. So whatever contribution 'value' makes to the overall assessment of a lens, is going to be transient. And I agree that there will be features that really need a short text explanation, like 'photo quality', things that are difficult to reduce to a single-digit score. Could be a fascinating project. And I'd certainly like to see ratings for the lenses I don't yet have! |
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on Dec 15, 2015 0:30:35 GMT
Last Edit: Dec 15, 2015 1:32:22 GMT by dragos
I think from the main list are missing some lens:
-The M42 Yashica Auto Yashinon DS 28mm 2.8 (Not the DS-M). They are 2 versions, one with SN on front and one with SN on side.
-Yashica Auto Yashikor 135mm 2.8 on M42 mount.
-Yashica Auto Yashikor 200mm 3.5 on M42mount
-Super Yashinon-R 400mm 6.3
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 1,892 (503 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Dec 21, 2015 3:14:07 GMT
Last Edit: Dec 21, 2015 3:16:10 GMT by biggles3
Hello again Dragos,
Thank you for your contribution. I have added them to the list although as yet I have no information on the optical formulae of these lenses; as I find them (hopefully) I will add those data.
I have also added a lens I knew nothing about but which sounds very impressive: a 500mm f5 mirror lens which came in a M42 mount. The image of this lens shows it to be about the same size as the Zeiss 500 f4.5 Mirotar. |
|
Group: Member
Post: 20 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2016
Status:
|
|
on Jan 1, 2016 0:41:00 GMT
Posted: Jan 1, 2016 0:41:00 GMT
Hello, and Happy New Year to everyone!  I hope this is the proper topic for my question - if not, please excuse me. I have just bought a second ML 28/2.8, because it came with its super-rare genuine lens hood. But I just realized, that the one I had previously is quite a strange one, like the one mentioned by dragos before: it has an 8-digit S/N. These are the two I have, with the mentioned one on the right: ML28/2.8The question is: how is the one with the 8-digit S/N considered? Is it good? Which series does it belong to? Thank you very much for your help in advance! |
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on Mar 25, 2016 18:33:53 GMT
Posted: Mar 25, 2016 18:33:53 GMT
There is another missing lens from the list:
Yashinon-DS Auto 50mm f2 (DS)
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 1,892 (503 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Mar 25, 2016 22:13:21 GMT
Posted: Mar 25, 2016 22:13:21 GMT
Hello, and Happy New Year to everyone! I hope this is the proper topic for my question - if not, please excuse me. I have just bought a second ML 28/2.8, because it came with its super-rare genuine lens hood. But I just realized, that the one I had previously is quite a strange one, like the one mentioned by dragos before: it has an 8-digit S/N. These are the two I have, with the mentioned one on the right: ML28/2.8The question is: how is the one with the 8-digit S/N considered? Is it good? Which series does it belong to? Thank you very much for your help in advance! I offer you a very late welcome to the Yashica Forum; please excuse this late response but I only just saw your question on the Forum – I apologise. You may have what is sometimes described as the MkIII version of the ML 28mm f2.8 which has a good reputation but a different optical formula (7 elements instead of 8) from that of it’s ML predecessors. If it came boxed, did it have the Yashica box or the Kyocera Yashica box? You have probably answered your own question by now on the quality of the lens as I’m sure you have compared them. I would be fascinated to hear your thoughts. I have only ever owned the MkII (standard) version and it is a very good performer; I will have to try and buy a 8-digit lens and test it. |
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 1,892 (503 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Mar 25, 2016 22:16:31 GMT
Posted: Mar 25, 2016 22:16:31 GMT
There is another missing lens from the list: Yashinon-DS Auto 50mm f2 (DS) Thanks dragos,
I have no details on the lens but have added it to the list.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 75 (3 liked)
Join date: April 2016
Status:
|
|
on Apr 7, 2016 7:26:59 GMT
Last Edit: Apr 7, 2016 7:27:45 GMT by rhalf
I just discovered this forum today and I want to begin with saying that it's a pleasure to read y'all.
Yesterday I received a box with some Yashica lenses. One of them is Yashica MC 75-200mm f4.5 Macro zoom.I couldn't find anything about this lens on the web, although it is on the list. What a relief!
It's not in very good state. The back wiggles. I didn't have time to look into it, but it seems It fell on a floor or something. . Do you know anything about this model?
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 1,892 (503 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Apr 7, 2016 20:36:51 GMT
Posted: Apr 7, 2016 20:36:51 GMT
Hello rhalf and welcome to the Forum!
The MC 75-200 f4.5 Macro is a pretty decent performer. It's not up to the quality of the legendary 70-210 f4 but is pretty close to that of the 70-210 f4.5 which certainly has its fans. And one advantage it has over both those lenses is a good macro facility that get down to 1:4.
It is the last of the classic mid-range manual zooms to be produced under the Yashica brand and has a reassuring quality feel to it as it boasts a metal barrel and mount and is not prone to zoom creep.
At f5.6-f8 it is a very competent performer and is compact enough to fit inside most camera bags.
You might want to see if you can tighten the 3 screws on the base of barrel (just above the ridge that sits on top of the aperture ring) as that might be the answer to the wiggle. If it has suffered a major drop, it is not worth getting it repaired as second-hand ones are pretty cheap - though it could make a good project. Do remember though that the correct screwdriver will be a JIS type - you can probably get away with a very small Phillips type but if one of the screws resists, you'll risk shredding the crosshead  without the correct JIS version.
Which other Yashica lenses did you acquire? |
|
Group: Member
Post: 75 (3 liked)
Join date: April 2016
Status:
|
|
on Apr 8, 2016 21:52:56 GMT
Posted: Apr 8, 2016 21:52:56 GMT
Biggles, I am amazed.
I didn't know about JIS crossheads. Luckily I figured I had a proper bit. What you said was all there was needed. I can't wait to try this glass out (it's my first telephoto and zoom lens). I can see it was owner's vavourite. Maybe it hans't fallen on the floor after all, but the wear is strong with this one.
I have to say I am new to Yashica. I found a nice offering and that's how I arrived here. They are:
Yashica FX3 Super
ML 28mm f/2.8, looks like new
ML 50mm f/1.9
And this 75-200 f/4.5.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Apr 9, 2016 2:03:28 GMT
Posted: Apr 9, 2016 2:03:28 GMT
I have to say I am new to Yashica. I found a nice offering and that's how I arrived here. They are: Yashica FX3 Super ML 28mm f/2.8, looks like new ML 50mm f/1.9 And this 75-200 f/4.5. Welcome to the Forum! That's a good batch to start with. PF |
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on May 17, 2016 9:29:59 GMT
Last Edit: May 17, 2016 9:31:21 GMT by dragos
I just discovered there is another missing lens from our list.
Seems to be a rare one, hard to find but not impossible.
I will be glad if someone have more info about this lens, like build and image quality: Yashica Yashinon-R 35mm 3.5 M42 (not super or auto yashinon)
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 154 (15 liked)
Join date: June 2015
Status:
|
|
on Jun 6, 2016 20:26:38 GMT
Posted: Jun 6, 2016 20:26:38 GMT
I will add here also another 35mm 2.8, **Yashica Auto DS-M**, different construction than the DS.
|
|
without the correct JIS version.
