Group: Member
Post: 7 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2023
Status:
|
|
on Jan 28, 2023 15:31:06 GMT
Posted: Jan 28, 2023 15:31:06 GMT
New here and with some questions I could not find an answer on so far.
Studied it well but I see some confusing info on which Yashica 35 + Minister rangefinder cameras have the 45mm 2.8, 5 elements 4 groups, (Biometar/ Xenotar type) and which the 45mm 2.8, 4 elements 3 groups, (Tessar type).
The Yashica 35 is the one I am most certain about the 5/4 Biometar type, an ad image shows the lens diagram.
The Yashica 35 YL1 is said to have the same lens.
The Minister III should have a 5/4 type as well but no reference whether it is the Biometar type. I see it described as a 4/3 type at other web pages though, so quite confusing.
Are that the only Yashica ones with the 5/4 elements/groups and possibly Biometar design?
The fixed lens 35 rangefinders lenses of all brands are based on Tessar 4/3, 5/4, 4/4 or Double Gauss 6/4, 6/5, 5/4 designs mainly. Some simpler Triplets or more element fast Double Gauss types to round it off. Few odd designs in the first camera models: Ricoh, Mamiya, for example.
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Jan 28, 2023 20:43:42 GMT
Posted: Jan 28, 2023 20:43:42 GMT
New here and with some questions I could not find an answer on so far. Studied it well but I see some confusing info on which Yashica 35 + Minister rangefinder cameras have the 45mm 2.8, 5 elements 4 groups, (Biometar/ Xenotar type) and which the 45mm 2.8, 4 elements 3 groups, (Tessar type). The Yashica 35 is the one I am most certain about the 5/4 Biometar type, an ad image shows the lens diagram. The Yashica 35 YL1 is said to have the same lens. The Minister III should have a 5/4 type as well but no reference whether it is the Biometar type. I see it described as a 4/3 type at other web pages though, so quite confusing. Are that the only Yashica ones with the 5/4 elements/groups and possibly Biometar design? The fixed lens 35 rangefinders lenses of all brands are based on Tessar 4/3, 5/4, 4/4 or Double Gauss 6/4, 6/5, 5/4 designs mainly. Some simpler Triplets or more element fast Double Gauss types to round it off. Few odd designs in the first camera models: Ricoh, Mamiya, for example. Welcome to the Forum! I hope you find this an entertaining and informative place to visit. Interestingly, there are two versions of the Yashica 35 and two of the YL, the difference being that in each case, the premium model has a f1.9 lens of Planar design (6/4) and the standard f2.8 version has a 5/4 Xenotar design (essentially a 5 element form of the original Planar). The Minister III & M3 also follow the 5/4 design. |
|
Group: Member
Post: 7 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2023
Status:
|
|
on Jan 29, 2023 9:44:36 GMT
Posted: Jan 29, 2023 9:44:36 GMT
Thank you.
Nice to be assured that the Minister III and M3 also have the Xenotar type lens. Considering all the fixed lens rangefinder models, including the Electro etc, is there any other 45mm 2.8 lens a Xenotar type than the four we already mentioned?
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,370 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Jan 29, 2023 10:36:21 GMT
Last Edit: Jan 29, 2023 10:37:54 GMT by lumiworx
Here's both speeds of my YL versions side by side... lumiworx.com/albums/camera-gear/content/yashica-35-yl-rangefinders-f28-f19If I can expand on what biggles3 wrote, it would be to clarify a bit on the differences in lens designs. I don't think that the 2.8 and the 1.9 adorned cameras had 2 (or more) designs for the 2,8 speed lenses and/or 2 (or more) designs for the 1.9, but rather that there was only 1 design type at each speed, and 3 of the rangefinder camera types as-noted had one or the other. I don't know with absolute certainty, but I doubt there was anything other than cosmetic differences between any of the same speed versions across multiple model years on all 3 body models. I don't think there were different optical diagrams or even glass formulas, but the same basic lenses were mounted on every successive version - and that includes the same 2.8 version mounted on the Yashica YK. The initial 35, the YL, and the Minister models had the 2 lens option, and aside from the later Lynx models ( the 14 and 14E) that had the upgraded f/1.4 rather than 1.9 lenses that had been given their own dedicated '14' model names, the only other possibility of having similar 2.8/1.9 lens options would have been the YK. Personally I've never seen one if there was one released, but I've learned to never say "never" about one showing up. |
|
Group: Member
Post: 7 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2023
Status:
|
|
on Jan 29, 2023 16:40:08 GMT
Posted: Jan 29, 2023 16:40:08 GMT
Here's both speeds of my YL versions side by side... lumiworx.com/albums/camera-gear/content/yashica-35-yl-rangefinders-f28-f19If I can expand on what biggles3 wrote, it would be to clarify a bit on the differences in lens designs. I don't think that the 2.8 and the 1.9 adorned cameras had 2 (or more) designs for the 2,8 speed lenses and/or 2 (or more) designs for the 1.9, but rather that there was only 1 design type at each speed, and 3 of the rangefinder camera types as-noted had one or the other. I don't know with absolute certainty, but I doubt there was anything other than cosmetic differences between any of the same speed versions across multiple model years on all 3 body models. I don't think there were different optical diagrams or even glass formulas, but the same basic lenses were mounted on every successive version - and that includes the same 2.8 version mounted on the Yashica YK. The initial 35, the YL, and the Minister models had the 2 lens option, and aside from the later Lynx models ( the 14 and 14E) that had the upgraded f/1.4 rather than 1.9 lenses that had been given their own dedicated '14' model names, the only other possibility of having similar 2.8/1.9 lens options would have been the YK. Personally I've never seen one if there was one released, but I've learned to never say "never" about one showing up. The Yashica 35 YK has a Tessar type 4 elements 3 groups design. I have that lens and did a CLA on it. Being a budget model I did not expect a Xenotar type lens in it either.
With the aperture closed, a point light gave 4 clear reflections at the front and not a faint one that could indicate cemented surfaces. At the rear 2 clear reflections and 1 faint reflection of cemented surfaces. All typical for a Tessar type. A Xenotar should give 4 clear reflections at the front + 1 faint reflection of the cemented surfaces in the second group, at the rear 4 clear reflections of two separate elements.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 7 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2023
Status:
|
|
on Feb 27, 2023 16:17:26 GMT
Posted: Feb 27, 2023 16:17:26 GMT
I see that the Yashikor 50mm 2.8 lenses for the Yashica SM rangefinders exist in two versions too. As 5 elements 4 groups and as 4 elements 3 groups designs.
Both introduced in 1959 so I guess representing a quality difference.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 7 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2023
Status:
|
|
on Mar 21, 2023 15:36:36 GMT
Posted: Mar 21, 2023 15:36:36 GMT
[quote author=" biggles3" The Minister III & M3 also follow the 5/4 design. [/quote] Well, an owner of a Minister III wrote the following: 'I can only confirm classic Tessar cemented doublet on rear side (behind the shutter blades). This one can be easily unscrewed and looks like single element but it is not the case (i had separation on mine).' |
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,370 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Mar 21, 2023 18:38:05 GMT
Posted: Mar 21, 2023 18:38:05 GMT
There doesn't seem to be any author attribution on the guide book, so I'd hesitate to say the details are from 'Official' sources -but- there is a 1972 handbook that has summary details on most/all of the early Yashica rangefinder models. On page 5 it has notes about the MIII 5/4 design, but doesn't go into specifics, nor does it have any visual diagrams that I can see with a quick browse. It could be that the iris/blades oddly intersect somewhere within the rear group. I'll readily admit I'm no optical designer or engineer and can't offer anything more meaningful than my observations on what lens designs I've run across over the decades while doing my own cleanings or minor repairs or looking over officially published diagrams, and experience shows it's not uncommon that the iris assembly doesn't always end up in the mid-point of the design. Looking through the datasheets on the Zeiss C/Y lenses can illustrate their assembly locations better than my meanderings can for Sonnar, Planar, and Tessar types. Yashica 35 Guide (via Butkus manuals): www.butkus.org/chinon/yashica/yashica_35mm_guide/yashica_35mm_guide.htmZeiss DataSheets (PDF files): cdn.yashicaforum.net/wl/?id=RJ7kUQdDAlv4KiJxHaK3Uj1ieRyhjHWNZeiss DataSheets (various spreadsheet files): yashica.boards.net/post/6551/thread |
|
Group: Member
Post: 7 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2023
Status:
|
|
on Mar 22, 2023 11:07:10 GMT
Posted: Mar 22, 2023 11:07:10 GMT
There doesn't seem to be any author attribution on the guide book, so I'd hesitate to say the details are from 'Official' sources -but- there is a 1972 handbook that has summary details on most/all of the early Yashica rangefinder models. On page 5 it has notes about the MIII 5/4 design, but doesn't go into specifics, nor does it have any visual diagrams that I can see with a quick browse. It could be that the iris/blades oddly intersect somewhere within the rear group. I'll readily admit I'm no optical designer or engineer and can't offer anything more meaningful than my observations on what lens designs I've run across over the decades while doing my own cleanings or minor repairs or looking over officially published diagrams, and experience shows it's not uncommon that the iris assembly doesn't always end up in the mid-point of the design. Looking through the datasheets on the Zeiss C/Y lenses can illustrate their assembly locations better than my meanderings can for Sonnar, Planar, and Tessar types. Yashica 35 Guide (via Butkus manuals): www.butkus.org/chinon/yashica/yashica_35mm_guide/yashica_35mm_guide.htmZeiss DataSheets (PDF files): cdn.yashicaforum.net/wl/?id=RJ7kUQdDAlv4KiJxHaK3Uj1ieRyhjHWNZeiss DataSheets (various spreadsheet files): yashica.boards.net/post/6551/thread
Thank you for the Yashica 35 Guide link!
I'm neither an optical designer but I am interested in the diversity of optical designs of the early 'compact' 35mm fixed lens rangefinders.
The 5/4 lens designs that can be found in 'compact' fixed lens rangefinders are either Unilite/Biometar/Xenotar designs or a kind of enhanced Tessar type with 3 separate elements in front of the iris. Schneider already made a lens like that in the 1930's for the Reflex Korelle, the Xenar 75mm 2.8. The C/Y Sonnar 85mm 2.8 in the Zeiss DataSheets has a similar design. The Sonnar 40/38mm 2.8 lenses for Rollei/Contax compacts also but wider of course. Olympus used it in at least 3 compact rangefinders.
So next to the Tessar, Biometar types, there could be a third optical design with a Yashinon 45mm 2.8 label in the 35mm rangefinders. Interesting, I will ask the owner whether he sees 6 reflections at the front side. It was probably easier to make than the Biometar type with that deep curved 4th element, yet the edge IQ is usually better in that type.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,370 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Mar 22, 2023 13:07:52 GMT
Posted: Mar 22, 2023 13:07:52 GMT
cyclope ... If you'd have any interest in trying to design your own, or just in investigating the optical designs of others, there are a few pieces of free software to play with. This topic has links: yashica.boards.net/post/7099/thread
|
|
