Group: Moderator
Post: 2,039 (562 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Nov 5, 2021 11:28:09 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 5, 2021 15:21:05 GMT by biggles3
This is quite a rare sight: Yashica's Yashikor 200mm f3.5 telephoto lens in M42 mount.  Auto Yashikor 200mm f3.5This was one of only four lenses carrying the Yashikor name for M42 mount cameras, the others being a 28mm, 35mm and 135mm. They all have earned fine reputations for centre sharpness but the 200mm is pretty impressive wide-open almost to the edge of the frame. If used on a crop-sensor digital camera, you'll always get the sweet spot and there's some impressive footage online with it being used for movie work. There is some debate about the provenance of the lens; while Yashica manufactured the Yashinons, it appears the jury is still out on whether this lens was produced in-house or outsourced. Regardless of the truth, it's a very good performer and well worth having. |
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 770 (71 liked)
Join date: August 2016
Status:
|
|
on Nov 5, 2021 12:54:31 GMT
Posted: Nov 5, 2021 12:54:31 GMT
What company is being suggested as the manufacturer -- other than Tomioka? It would seem unusual in that era for Yashica or Tomioka to outsource a particular lens. Maybe a bargain lens, but this doesn't qualify.
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,039 (562 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Nov 5, 2021 15:07:33 GMT
Posted: Nov 5, 2021 15:07:33 GMT
What company is being suggested as the manufacturer -- other than Tomioka? It would seem unusual in that era for Yashica or Tomioka to outsource a particular lens. Maybe a bargain lens, but this doesn't qualify. Hi - Komine has been mentioned, as was Vivitar but I don't think Vivitar was the OEM. If you look at the Vivitar M42 200 f3.5 (Ebay item: 255107203119), it is near identical in overall shape, albeit with slightly different markings, and the serial numbers start with 28 which signifies Komine as the manufacturer. |
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 770 (71 liked)
Join date: August 2016
Status:
|
|
on Nov 5, 2021 18:43:36 GMT
Posted: Nov 5, 2021 18:43:36 GMT
I don't get anything for that EBAY listing, but all of the Komine-made Vivitar 200mm f3.5 lenses I've seen have markings that are very different from yours. For example, the closest distance mark to infinity on your lens is 40 meters & 50 feet. On the Komine, it is 30 meters & 100 feet. In addition, the mark/line for the distance/f-stop is different, so is the IR mark. Plus the DOF scale is much wider on the Yashica. While Vivitar undoubtedly had other 200mm f3.5 lenses, I doubt the Komine one (I've seen different waffling on Komine's) was used by Yashica.
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,039 (562 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Nov 6, 2021 11:16:11 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 8, 2021 9:33:05 GMT by biggles3
I don't get anything for that EBAY listing, but all of the Komine-made Vivitar 200mm f3.5 lenses I've seen have markings that are very different from yours. For example, the closest distance mark to infinity on your lens is 40 meters & 50 feet. On the Komine, it is 30 meters & 100 feet. In addition, the mark/line for the distance/f-stop is different, so is the IR mark. Plus the DOF scale is much wider on the Yashica. While Vivitar undoubtedly had other 200mm f3.5 lenses, I doubt the Komine one (I've seen different waffling on Komine's) was used by Yashica. You may well be right. As I mentioned, there is speculation about this lens' provenance and I would certainly prefer to think it was made in-house. In addition to Komine, I have seen suggestions that it could be a re-badged Tokina though I have yet to spot a Tokina m42 200 f3.5 with a similar appearance. The Yashikor brand is interesting: it became familiar to those buying some of the earlier Yashica TLRs and in later years, very familiar to people with the Electro 35s as they provided the supplementary tele- and wide- converters for their 45mm Yashinon-DX lenses. Build quality on all the m42s is impressive and I use the 28mm quite often despite occasional issues with flare. Where the Yashikor brand really shines is in their m39 50mm lenses, both of which are mightily impressive performers. It would be great if we could find someone with insight into Yashica's lens branding. I can understand the move from Yashimar to Yashikor as the name change underlined the change of ownership from Yashima to Yashica. I have always assumed the speedy disappearance of the Yashikor marque was to reflect the major improvements to the optical construction of their new lenses under the name of Yashinon and its sub-brands. But there could be other explanations... |
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,370 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Nov 7, 2021 23:19:24 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 7, 2021 23:20:08 GMT by lumiworx
It might come down to comparing the optical diagrams from one lens series to another, and see if there's a radical difference with the element counts or groupings -or- if there's little difference in the design, and it's only the glass types and coatings that are different. It seems logical that the closer 2 diagrams are, the more likely they'd come from the same source, and the minor differences only show an economical deviation of the same basic design.
Keep in mind that in the later M42 era, makers didn't have designers using computers. I have no idea when the first optical software showed up, but I highly doubt it was anywhere close to when these lenses were built. I have to assume it was still a very time and trial intensive task to go from start to finish with every design. That means money, time, and the need for more eyes and hands working on every design. Everything I remember reading from the trade press seems to suggest that the Yashikor/Yashimar lines were the 'budget' line and also left me with the (fading) impression they were made in-house.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 770 (71 liked)
Join date: August 2016
Status:
|
|
on Nov 8, 2021 15:46:20 GMT
Posted: Nov 8, 2021 15:46:20 GMT
That all makes sense except a Yashikor 200mm f3.5 as a budget lens? Seems out of place. For example, Minolta had its budget line, CELTIC, and a 200mm. It was an f4 lens, as compared to their more expensive Rokkor f3.5.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,370 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Nov 8, 2021 18:43:01 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 8, 2021 18:44:54 GMT by lumiworx
That all makes sense except a Yashikor 200mm f3.5 as a budget lens? Seems out of place. For example, Minolta had its budget line, CELTIC, and a 200mm. It was an f4 lens, as compared to their more expensive Rokkor f3.5. I'm not suggesting that in practice they are budget lenses as a matter of personal opinion - but as an example of what I'd mentioned about the trade press' view of the general Yashikor/Yashimar model line of lenses, here's an excerpt from an article from the May 1990 issue of Popular Photography...  A link to Google Books that is a full issue preview to read the whole article... books.google.com/books?id=G3D3v_S6X7UC&lpg=RA5-PA6&dq=Yashikor&pg=RA5-PA6#v=onepage&q=Yashikor&f=falseThis is just one of many review articles that all seem to have a similar conclusion, but I don't recall any specific cameras/lenses that were detailed with their specific underlying reasons... only that most times reviewers favored Yashinons by a large margin. Similar to Minolta's Celtic line, there's the YUS line for Yashica C/Y mount, and I don't think anyone would argue that they're premium grade optics. The difference here might be that during the time period that Yashica used Yashikor/Yashimar lenses, they were mostly 'embedded' lenses, and not interchangeable mounts. They weren't necessarily something folks could do A/B comparisons with like we do for SLR lenses. |
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 770 (71 liked)
Join date: August 2016
Status:
|
|
on Nov 8, 2021 20:05:49 GMT
Posted: Nov 8, 2021 20:05:49 GMT
The era has a lot to do with it as well, as many companies changed their lens names over time, and the older lenses were typically thought to be inferior simply because they had an older name. Fuji is a good example. Their lenses were first labeled FUJINAR, and many of these are great lenses -- for many formats. When they added lens coatings to some of their lenses, they became FUJINON. But some of the Fujinon lenses were actually the same as the earlier Fujinar models.
|
|
