Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Aug 11, 2019 21:00:28 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 11, 2019 21:03:34 GMT by lenslover
The funny thing is - being a native german, lumiworx is always predicting, posting after some time being here on the YASHICA Board, that ZEiSS into general is being the always better alternative, vs. Yashica (ML), he implies as verdict, as being made of higher quality, to higher standarts, optically, so i do interpret and read his posts...this sounds a bit snobbish for my ears, which means -eyes, for reading onto a Yashica Forum, no offense. Yes, i am a Zeiss Lens Lover also since the mid 80's, but i also like my Yashica Lenses way much, and Voigtländer. And Leica, but i can't afford Leica Gear & Lenses, so i do stick with what i do have, and can afford. What is real, is this - i do have 3+ decades experience with Contax Yashica C/Y Mount Lenses since the SLR 35mm Era, and whileas Contax is way often (but not always) being the best Lens in each focal length and aperture speed, hence therefore "class" (if one compare them to their Yashica ML counterpart) Yashica does have some really good ML Series Lenses, which hold their own, and even being into 2019 (and way beyound) being remarkable, excellent lenses, for those who know and appreciate, like them....and for which there is simply no Contax Zeiss 1:1 Counterpart - for instance, the famous Yashica 28-50/3.5 ML Zoom, the 35-70/3.5 ML is another great lens, which does have it's Contax Zeiss 35-70/3.4 Counterpart, i do own both, whileas the Yashica is being a bit different, it's still a great lens. I know the whole Zeiss Story, i do know the Yashica Story, so much for that. Good Night.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,371 (303 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Aug 13, 2019 2:45:04 GMT
Posted: Aug 13, 2019 2:45:04 GMT
It might be that there was something lost in a reply, and unfortunately I don't know German to say it in a better way. I tried to make a point of explaining the choice in more than one reply here. It had nothing to do with my brand preference, and nothing to do with anything other than being practical in spending a little instead of a lot. I purchased 2 of the ML 70-210's, and 1 the ML 80-200 lenses and was disappointed that those - and ONLY those - 3 lenses were not as good as my expectations for the photos I've seen where those models were used to capture them. I already had a fair investment in buying the 3 of them and wasn't about to assume that buying 1 or 2 or 3 more was going to get me 1 good copy of each. So if that makes me a snob for making a 1 time purchase for a more expensive lens that I will probably not use more than once or twice a year, then I guess I'm a snob. If you take a look at my gallery, it should be obvious that I'm certainly not a fanboy for any lens brand. Each photo's caption has the lens and settings used to capture it, and lists Spiratone T2's and Mamiya Sekor and Sears M42's, along with the ML and Zeiss lenses, plus many, many others. I use a lens because of it's characteristics and capabilities, and the brand and price are irrelevant if the image isn't what I want to produce with it. Once upon a time, I was a working pro photog, and I never once had to loose any work because I used - or didn't use - some particular brand of gear - and (presumably) I continued to work because of the images I created. To go even further off the topic, I hardly think a Zeiss snob would have received the following package today - especially when it cost me more than the Zeiss 35-70mm cousin that I already have... With only 3 very quick test shots straight from the box and no glass cleanup at all, I think it's fair to say it will do as well, if not better, than the Zeiss for the equivalent ranges. ...now back to our regularly scheduled topic......
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Aug 14, 2019 7:25:28 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 14, 2019 7:31:29 GMT by lenslover
Great condition, i got the same lens twice. All good, thanks for the statement, it was "read", understood differently, hereby. I am also myself not being a "fanboy" of any brand, i do just use the brands, lenses, gear what i do like. I do buy a lens for it's specific focal length or range, if it's a zoom, and by it's rendering qualities. You paid more, for the ML 35-70/3.5, than for it's Zeiss 35-70/3.4 Cousin? Well, i do see a offer for =< 224 since at least around ~2 months, then the Zeiss 35-70 goes from ~250 to ~550 EUR, depending onto the condition. Can't remember what i've paid for mine, it was into DM, and early 90's.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,371 (303 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Aug 15, 2019 7:43:19 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 15, 2019 7:44:09 GMT by lumiworx
I'm glad the explanation made its way through.
The Zeiss was part of an auction bundle over a year ago that was described as "an RTS body", but showed the lens in every photo. In the end I paid considerably less than the going rate for the lens, and got a working RTS II and W-6 winder in the deal, since I assume nobody asked if the lens was included. The next highest bidder probably thought I was nuts to bid so much on an untested camera and winder. :) The ML might have been on the high side, but it's in near-mint condition and has flawless optics, so I figure between the 2 auctions, I evened everything out - with (virtual) money left in my pocket.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Aug 16, 2019 22:49:05 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 16, 2019 22:50:32 GMT by lenslover
My copy does look the same, but i am using the slightly scuffed one, which i'd let repair soon, that means cleaning, and would repaint a few, way little scuffs with matte black enamel paint from revell, this works great, i've used this "trick" many years ago onto a 2nd hand bought EOS DSLR Body.
Great Deal, and also with the RTS II - i do got the RTS original SLR only from these series, but the RX, and 167mt, also.
|
|