Yashica Minister III - all 3 versions

Please don't push this "Tomioka" legend - it was being discussed for ages onto the web, the truth is, 2 freaks made a urban legend, to sell a 08/15 Lens hyped artificially for some 500-700 EUR, and truth #2 is, there are still into 2022 100's of jerks, posting urban legends on eBay claiming "Leica" Quality from their Tomioka 08/15 Lenses - it's ridiculous, and insane.

I debunked this myth here also more than once. Nothing against you, Xkaes, but you don't seem to be 1) native german or 2) being aware of the Tomioka myth - it was back into the old days the standard glass, hence -lenses supplier for Yashica.

About the urban Tomioka myth, use google translate to get this into english, original link is still here, from kameradoktor.de:

End of story is, some un-useful idiot(s) came out with the myth, and started selling the 55mm F1.2 Tomioka for extraordinary high prices.

Many internet forum trolls had taken this myth - without ever checking facts or the truth behind it.

"Preface October 2010
Through my answer-email (following) to an "offended" Tomioka-owner and my following researches in the internet
and my following research on the Internet, I became aware of the Tomioka myth, which was only "born" in 2005.
The claims on the "birth page" of the two "producers", which were full of contradictions, were not proven by anything.
of the two "producers" were not quiet for someone who had read every test and news of the analogue photo world since the mid-70s.
photographic world since the mid 70's, was not to be accepted in silence.

Of course, it was clear to me that, apart from me, many other photographic people with a clear mind would find these
grotesque assertions and striking contradictions in the "story".
But it was also clear that at least quite a number of photo friends either did not read the Tomioka page
had not read the Tomioka page at all or had read it only very cursorily and completely uncritically, then had taken this fairy tale as the truth and had
and in the worst case had bought a Tomioka for a fantasy sum.

These seduced disciples I did not want to convert (probably I could not either),
but further victims should be prevented by my info page.
I would never have guessed to what extent this myth had already poisoned innocent photographers' souls,
and in which wasps' nest of Tomiokians ready to fight my text would poke until today.

It's a good thing that I haven't set up a guestbook here, and that only now and then, by chance, via google
I come across a forum post of one or the other Tomioka wasp.
Almost consistently it shows up there that the wasps have not only not (objectively) read the Tomioka page,
but also my text.
Like angry religious fighters they defend their faith and ignore factual evidence.
All sorts of base motives and interests are imputed to me,
Mostly those that are completely alien to me, and against which my text is directed.

One or the other Leica fan will also be among them, because in my first indignation I
I wrote down the text loosely and also criticized the Leitz Noctilux.
But that just shows that ANY exaggerated enthusiasm for a particular brand went/goes against the grain for me.
The two original Tomiokans write themselves that they never had a Noctilux for test comparison,
but they use the Noctilux, which they (unknown to them) highly praised, to praise the Tomioka even higher.

A not-so-good Noctilux is used as "comparison" evidence to praise a not-so-great Tomioka.
Tomioka, and this in turn helps all porcelains suspected of being related to Tomioka
to all Porsts, Revues, Cosinons and Yashinons suspected of being related to Tomioka,
can also be "suspected" of the highest quality by those willing to believe.

By the way, in the Color Foto Test of 1980 that I mentioned, the old (1975) Noctilux 1.0/50mm
had to compete against the top league of the 1.2/50s, and it is clear to anyone who has a little idea,
that 1.0 and 1.2 are worlds apart in lens calculation and construction.
The old 1.0 Noctilux was certainly a good lens at the time of its launch.
(and very useful for available light photography given the film supply at the time).
1.0s, but 1.2s just had it easy to be significantly better in absolute terms.

Viktor Hälke
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 2007"


Email to a Tomioka fan ( 1.2/55 mm ) or
"How did the Tomioka fairy tale actually come about?"

Hi photo friend,

good that you sent me the link, because I am by no means a Tomioka expert.
Nor did I mean to trash (your) Tomioka, nor praise my Cosina 1.2/55 above all else.

I was just always bothered by the aggressive one-sided praise of the "own" brand,
as Leica owners have always liked to do.
Most of them did not even know that until recently almost all Leica lenses were based on
were based on Zeiss calculations.

My Tomioka skepticism was not triggered by you either,
but the conspicuous gushing in ebay and some forums.
I didn't miss a photo magazine or test from 1973 to 85,
but Tomiokas did not stand out there
(I remember tens of brand names, but not Tomioka).

If there to the raving also suddenly still outrageously high starting prices
(300-600 €) appear on ebay (and "Oh horror, end at over 400 €"),
one becomes suspicious and asks oneself: What is behind it?

After I was now on the Tomioka fan page, I have the suspicion,
that the two photo friends have at least part of the fairy tale (oops...myth).

They even literally speak of the "Tomioka myth" and declare it a
a main goal of their page to spread this myth even further.
Maybe they had some 1.2s to sell in 2005, because they also talk about it,
several in comparison with the Noctilux.

The certainly well-considered enthusiasm for the Noctilux is striking.
That was and is, by the way, also such a completely misplaced myth.
The first enthusiasm in the 70s can still be accepted,
because there were hardly any light giants and the sensitive films were a disaster.
catastrophe.

At the latest, the test with the subsequent competitors (see below Test Color Photo 1980)
should have stopped the myth, because the Noctilux 1.0/50 was the worst (grotesquely poor)
(lousy) among the fastest lenses. But once a myth is there....

www.tomioka.de

On closer reading, the Tomioka page turns out to be a confused hodgepodge,
made by people who don't have the right perspective,
but stitch together a company "story" that doesn't fit together anywhere.

To "prove" the outstanding Tomioka quality, they simply claim that
the "famous" Tomioka lenses from the 50s are top quality lenses.
But Yashica lenses are shown, and Yashica is said to have taken over Tomioka only in 1968.
(besides, in the 50s, the European optical products might have been ahead of the
optics products may have been ahead in the 50s).

Also what is then still quoted, are absolutely no milestones in the lens construction.
Somehow the two have probably also noticed that this will not convince anyone,
and tried to enhance the 1.2 Tomioka with the "Noctilux effect" (what is that?).
upgrade.

The Leitzians, who still haven't realized that at least the 1.0 Noctilux is "junk" (pardon the pun).
was "junk" (excuse me. See preface), will not like to hear the comparison with their own myth and will
and will freak out when they read the formula
1.2 Tomioka = Noctilux.

Asterix would say: The Romans are crazy.

Anyone who has a Tomioka and knows the Noctilux tests won't wish
that his lens is as "good" as a 1.0 Noctilux.
There is also every indication that the Tomioka is more of a 1.2/55 Yashica, which the
Leica (worst lens in the test) easily outperformed it (see test excerpt, link below).

The two paragraphs about the Tomioka and the Noctilux are brimming with hair-raising nonsense:

1. first one did comparison tests with a Noctilux,

2. then one did not have a "real"(?) one at all, but (!?!)

3. the experiences with this lens confirm their claims (huh?)

4. then "the noctiluxes on ebay usually cost more than 4000 euros" (ojeh!)

5. they don't know much about the different Noctilux versions either

6. that they never had a Noctilux for testing is believable, if they are talking about the
the exceptional sharpness already at 1.2. 7.

7. it's nice that the Noctilux also "makes strong colors", which you can also use
really good in the colorless night.

If sooo is a Tomioka, of course everyone wants to have one for 599 (ebay) euros,
and I understand that nobody wants my 1.2 Cosina for 120,
not to speak of my 1.2/50 Pentax (in the test even better than the good Yashica)
for 270 not to speak of.
By the way, the Tomiokans in the "test" show a Yashinon 1.2/55mm Tomioka,
but overwrite and name it 2x with Cosinon 1.2/55mm Tomioka.
It seems that not everything is so clear with the company affiliation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The full text of this is all under the link from kameradoktor.de - sorry for the off topic, but you guys should see, there is nothing special about "Tomioka" and that shitty, stupid pseudo "hype", some freaks did already some 15-16 years ago, at least...