Finally getting (back) into the ML game.

Welcome, Alex...

For an entirely different reason (and from a 1980's time frame), I've also been rebuilding my ML lenses, but for stills. In some respects it has been beneficial when gaining better glass than owned in the past, but in my case there were certainly a few frogs kissed to get to the better optics I have now. Ultimately I've expanded on what I had before, so that too has its benefits.

It's true that there's an obvious gap in focal lengths in the short tele range of Yashica glass without an 85mm or 90mm 'portrait' length - but - I might be able to offer you a compromise if you'd be willing to eek out a few more millimeters. The ML 100mm Macro can slip into place as a stunning prime that's plenty sharp, and it's still 100% Yashica underneath in terms of optical qualities for color, contrast, and separation depth. It will additionally give you macro capabilities of course, but it's very capable of handling infinity equally well. It might be a bit on the rare side and they can get slightly pricey if you're impatient, but it would match up really well optically to everything else in your set.

If you really prefer sticking to an 85mm, there's also the two possibilities from Zeiss in C/Y mount too. The Sonnar at f/2.8, or the Planar at f/1.4. The Sonnar is probably available more often than the ML 100, but the pricing should roughly be similar between them. The Planar can get even pricier, but it's capabilities can be worth the difference when you really need the extra 1+ stops it offers.

One word of caution if you're tempted into the Zeiss camp. One C/Y Zeiss lens is never enough. :)

It was unfortunate that the weather was so bad that I couldn't do more than 3 test shots with the 15mm, but Dragos has posted several images taken on a Sony A7 in the forum and I think they're pretty indicative of the results most users can expect in its native fish-eye form. At least the de-fishing seems to work rather well and that's encouraging for still users.

Which begs the question... Is there any digital processes available in video to help with corrections for fish-eye distortion? I'm curious about what the results would be - even without any correction. Are you shooting in full frame, or in a cropped format body for video?

Another alternative, but this time for the ML 15mm, might be the ML 21mm f/3.3 lens. Although it's not quite the same in viewing angle, it is a rectilinear type, so there's no curved distortions as deliberate as with the fish-eye. In Yashica branding it's the widest in the rectilinear ML line, but again, there are several Zeiss variations in both types.

If 2.8 is sufficient, you should really consider the Zeiss 2.8/85. Its so tiny and smart. I sold mine, when I bought the 1.4/85 and there are times when I regret that.

Thanks for the feedback, y’all!

I have looked over both the Sonnar and the Planar many times. Personally, I prefer the Planar’s 8-blade aperture to the Sonnar’s 6-blade. And the f/1.4 doesn’t hurt for my purposes.

Waiting on the last two productions I’ve worked to pay before I can pull the trigger on one of these... but I’m also looking at a new 4K cinema camera (which will then be taken out with my MLs for a little hands-on testing).