Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Nov 4, 2019 16:00:07 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 4, 2019 16:07:22 GMT by lenslover
Hi Forum,
i do know since decades, there are at least 4 various iterations of this Lens, which are:
Yashica ML 35-70/3.5 Yashica ML 35-70/4 Yashica MC 35-70/3.5-4.5 Yashica ML 35-70/3.5-4.8
(Yashica AF 35-70/4, for the Yashica AF 200/230, 270 & 300 AF SLR) into () because it's for the orphaned Yashica AF System, which came to life into 1987, and a good Zoom Lens, not bad after all, therefore not into this 4 Listings)
This is the LineUp, from best to worst. The oddball hereby is the "ML" 35-70, which is being a all plasticky lens (well, not the lenses itself) and with the "ML" tag, but but worst built quality of them all, and least Image Quality. What do you guys think of the MC 35-70/3.5-4.5?
Here are some samples via Flickr, i know for many years:
Looking pretty decent for such a lowcost 35-70, if you ask me.
Funny thing, i do have 2 copies of them into my Yashica Collection, but it turns out, i've never used them, aside the 35-70/3.5 ML. I've just looked at my FR-1 Bodies, and found a almost pristine 35-70 MC Zoom hereby, looking mint.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Nov 7, 2019 3:29:15 GMT
Posted: Nov 7, 2019 3:29:15 GMT
To which of the three ML 35-70 lenses are you referring to as oddball? Is it the 3.5-4.8?
PF
|
|
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 Nov 7, 2019 12:02:36 GMT
Posted: Nov 7, 2019 12:02:36 GMT
Hello lenslover,
I would generally agree with the order you have suggested but when it comes to the MC 35-70, I have noticed variations of quality in the lenses, with the worst offenders being those starting with A followed by only 5 numerals. I do have one very poor example of a C238xx numbered lens but the other C versions are among the best of the bunch. Equally, although I would rate the general build quality of the f3.5-4.8 as the poorest, I have one which is wonderfully sharp and relatively distortion-free at its 70mm Macro setting.
I have tended to avoid all MC designated lenses, only adding them to my inventory when they've been part of a larger kit, as I was advised that they do not use the Yashica's proprietary ML coatings and are made by Cosina using their own Multi-Coating formula. The oddball is the ML f3.5-4.8 as my understanding is that, although they too were manufactured/assembled by Cosina, the lens used Yashica glass with the front element having the ML coating.
Quality control seems to have been a common issue with the final production runs of many Yashica-branded lenses, few of which were actually made by Yashica. The bottom line is, if you have a really good copy of a lens, don't let it go as you can't be sure that a replacement will match its performance, especially with a late serial number.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Nov 7, 2019 17:41:41 GMT
Last Edit: Nov 7, 2019 17:44:55 GMT by lenslover
To which of the three ML 35-70 lenses are you referring to as oddball? Is it the 3.5-4.8? PF Yes, because it does have the "ML" moniker, but is all plastics body from the haptics, and further, the slowest from Lens aperture speed, and IQ. I do remember, back into the day, when getting it with the FR-1, it costed almost nothing as AddOn, so it was being bought with it, but never being used. Well, Sample Variation with this MC 35-70/3.5-4.5 might also come into place.
I do know, that the ML 35-70/3.5-4.8 was being made by Cosina. (which is generally speaken not a bad thing - i've seen excellent samples also from this Lens,
from someone into the fredmiranda forum, but sample variation might here also play a huge role - my ML 35-70/3.5-4.8 was being optically way inferior,
to all the other 35-70 Yashica Lenses.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Nov 8, 2019 2:04:02 GMT
Posted: Nov 8, 2019 2:04:02 GMT
To which of the three ML 35-70 lenses are you referring to as oddball? Is it the 3.5-4.8? PF Yes, because it does have the "ML" moniker, but is all plastics body from the haptics, and further, the slowest from Lens aperture speed, and IQ. I do remember, back into the day, when getting it with the FR-1, it costed almost nothing as AddOn, so it was being bought with it, but never being used. Well, Sample Variation with this MC 35-70/3.5-4.5 might also come into place.
I do know, that the ML 35-70/3.5-4.8 was being made by Cosina. (which is generally speaken not a bad thing - i've seen excellent samples also from this Lens,
from someone into the fredmiranda forum, but sample variation might here also play a huge role - my ML 35-70/3.5-4.8 was being optically way inferior,
to all the other 35-70 Yashica Lenses.
Yep, the old sample variation could be quite strong in that version of the lens. Likely due to handling and environmental issues.
PF
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Jan 19, 2020 10:23:33 GMT
Posted: Jan 19, 2020 10:23:33 GMT
Yes, mine was basically free, it came with a FX-3, so i couldn't complain, and it looks like being fallen out of the box, basically 9.5/10 condition. Maybe i'd give it a spin...
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Apr 12, 2020 10:24:24 GMT
Posted: Apr 12, 2020 10:24:24 GMT
Greetings Friends, i've just loaded a new Battery into my 270 AF, it works - what only is very annoying, the "beep" when AF is being confirmed..i haven't found anything, to switch this off, inside the Manual...does anybody knew something, or must i do life with this? Happy Easter, especially into these hard Pandemic Times!
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Apr 13, 2020 2:34:20 GMT
Posted: Apr 13, 2020 2:34:20 GMT
Greetings Friends, i've just loaded a new Battery into my 270 AF, it works - what only is very annoying, the "beep" when AF is being confirmed..i haven't found anything, to switch this off, inside the Manual...does anybody knew something, or must i do life with this? Happy Easter, especially into these hard Pandemic Times! Set the AF on Continuous, that should get rid of it.
PF
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Apr 13, 2020 21:10:21 GMT
Posted: Apr 13, 2020 21:10:21 GMT
I've seen that, but this sounds somehow weird. I did some shots today, 5 exactly, so perhaps this roll is being finished earlier than i do think.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Apr 14, 2020 2:23:07 GMT
Posted: Apr 14, 2020 2:23:07 GMT
I've seen that, but this sounds somehow weird. I did some shots today, 5 exactly, so perhaps this roll is being finished earlier than i do think. Actually, I should have said put the Drive in Continuous. Tried it on mine, and it does work. You go by the green indicator light instead. Just don't hold the shutter release too long.
PF
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 435 (15 liked)
Join date: July 2016
Status:
|
|
on Apr 14, 2020 21:57:40 GMT
Last Edit: Apr 14, 2020 21:58:56 GMT by lenslover
I've seen that, but this sounds somehow weird. I did some shots today, 5 exactly, so perhaps this roll is being finished earlier than i do think. Actually, I should have said put the Drive in Continuous. Tried it on mine, and it does work. You go by the green indicator light instead. Just don't hold the shutter release too long.
PF
I know. With digital, not a issue, because of memory cards, with Film, i am too worried to try it out. Perhaps it would snap some frames, instead of one, even when subtle pressing the shutter. I didn't checked out the threshold of this shutter button via continous AF Mode. With my FR1, i am perfectly fine. No black, blank exposure, same with my RTS/II. The 230 Super/270 AF Shutter must being noticeable depressed to make a single exposure.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 2 (0 liked)
Join date: February 2021
Status:
|
|
on Feb 16, 2021 15:31:45 GMT
Last Edit: Feb 16, 2021 15:46:29 GMT by jojar
Hi, I am new in forum. Can anyone tell me, what do orange lines on the lens body mean? ibb.co/VY8BhzjAre they depth-of-field marks? if yes, why not symmetrical? Secondly, the green numbers in the left, are they actually in reversed order? So the fully extended lens would show 70mm, am I wrong?
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,370 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Feb 16, 2021 16:55:00 GMT
Posted: Feb 16, 2021 16:55:00 GMT
Welcome to the forum, jojar ... It's been a while since I've had to actually think about the technical explanation, but if my memory hasn't failed me... The 2 lines on the central barrel (orange/red) show the mid-point of the relative depth of field as the lens get's adjusted through each focal length. The one that curves - starting from the "R" - is meant to represent the infrared compensation value captured by the film or sensor, while the other straight one is the line for standard color and black & white use. The infrared field range isn't consistant as the zoom level changes. The ML 35-70mm f/3.5 doesn't share the same curved IR line... both lines are parallel through the whole range. I assume both the optical diagrams and the glass compositions are very different between versions. And... the internal mechanics on some one-touch Yashica and Contax lenses will show the focal length markings as reversed. As an example, both of the 35-70mm versions (MC and ML f/3.5) seem backwards, as well as the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 35-70mm f/3.4 - but the ML 28-85mm has the wider 28mm end active when the zoom is collapsed.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 2 (0 liked)
Join date: February 2021
Status:
|
|
on Feb 22, 2021 10:03:32 GMT
Posted: Feb 22, 2021 10:03:32 GMT
Many Thanks!!!
|
|