Group: Administrator
Post: 1,369 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Jun 15, 2020 3:28:47 GMT
Posted: Jun 15, 2020 3:28:47 GMT
Forgive the very quickly snapped samples. This wasn't meant to be a comparison of IQ - just a representation of the surprising outcome I found in magnification and adaptation hardware used, and to share some observations. I plan on doing something more suitable with the Yashinon when I can get an interesting subject to shoot, and the time to do a proper setup on a tripod. A couple of caveats on the Yashinon before I forget them. Before I attempted to take any pictures, I removed the condensor lens (the secondary lens above the carrier slot) and took one test shot. It seemed a bit 'mushy' and lower contrast than I would have hoped, so I reassembled the lens with the condensor in place. All the mush went away, the contrast improved, and the IQ was improved quite a bit - and without any obvious difference in magnification! That was a total surprise. Another surprise was in the actual mounting needed to get a well focused picture. The 90mm Elgeet f/4.5 lens (used to show the different outcomes), will never work unless it's mounted on at least a 90mm macro tube or equally long bellows. In this case, it was a Leica LTM 39mm screw mount tube, which is then mounted to the L39 to Sony E-Mount adapter, and then mounted to the camera. It can accept even more tubes beyond the 90, but it will not focus at all otherwise. The Yashinon will not take any tubes at all. It will only focus if it is directly screwed into the L39/Sony adapter and then mounted to the camera. Not having any instructions on how to actually use it as the enlarger lens may have provided some clues on why that is, but for now, it works only without any extensions. It might work with an L39 to M42 to C/Y adapter for film use, but that's another set of tests. Since I've just started doing the testing, I have not had a chance yet to come up with some sort of covering for the negative carrier slot on the side of the Yashinon's barrel, so amazingly enough, I shot with nothing plugging the hole! I'm flabergasted that it didn't adversely affect the photos I took with it. I fully expected to see bad flair or contrast shifts, but it worked like it didn't matter. Daylight and outdoors shooting might be more problematic. One last bit, is that the Elgeet is not the best enlarging lens I have, but it was the quickest one at hand to compare the difference in output when using L39 tubes, so please pay no attention to the pics of the dimes as a demonstration of resolving power or final sharpness. To add to that, the shots are hand-held, and done in really crappy 9 watt LED desk lighting. So... onto the photos. The lenses first, and then a combo of the 2 test shots. The Yashinon mounted on the L39 to E-Mount adapter, and the Elgeet popped into the end of a 90mm Leica macro tube from the 1930's, with the 30mm and 60mm tubes opposite that stack. The top-down view of lenses and tubes. Minimum focus distance (lens rim, to dime) was about 9-10 inches for the Elgeet, and required moving the whole lens/tube/mount/camera assembly to focus. The minimum on the Yashinon was about 30-40mm, and I could focus a fair amount of distance with the lens's built-in helicoid. Quite a bit of focusing differences between the 2 setups. There is one additional detail on the test pics worth mentioning. They were exported from Lightroom without any manipulation - except - to remove the slight bit of CA from both lenses' photos and sufficient noise removal to reflect the actual scene as-shot. There's no sharpening, color, contrast, or any other enhancements beyond those. The lint or fuzzies from the Yashinon shot were not viewable by the naked eye, so that alone should tell you something. In case you're wondering - I won this at an auction for an embarrasingly low price. I can't explain why it didn't even reach as high as the lowball bid I put in for it (thinking I couldn't possibly win), unless the fact that it had no carrier, no papers, or any type of box, could have made it a 'pass on it' item for collectors - or that it had 'something' on the lens that "didn't look too bad". For a no fungus and no haze lens, it did in fact have both, but it was an easy cleanup. More pics in larger (and much larger) sizes in the testbed here.
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,033 (561 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Jun 15, 2020 9:27:53 GMT
Posted: Jun 15, 2020 9:27:53 GMT
Outstanding!
A great acquisition, fascinating test and some excellent images...congratulations on a job very well done!
|
|
Deleted
Group: Member
Post: 0 ( liked)
Join date: January 1970
Status:
|
|
on Jun 15, 2020 16:08:55 GMT
Posted: Jun 15, 2020 16:08:55 GMT
I'll second that! Great job!
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,369 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Jun 17, 2020 22:32:17 GMT
Last Edit: Jun 17, 2020 22:39:02 GMT by lumiworx
Thank you both for the kind words. I'm hoping that if anyone had, or will, want to use the Yashinon like a standard macro lens, there might be something useful in these observations.
It might also strike some as odd that there's such a swing in magnification between these two lenses - especially since there's such a huge difference in focal lengths. It might seem that I cropped either or both of the dime shots, but they are both left in the same framing as they were shot, and then equally resized to post them for viewing. I am merely a user of lenses, and the engineering behind 'why' is beyond my pay-grade, but I assume that it's also tied into why the tubes are needed on the Elgeet, and not on the Yashinon.
As far as the tubes (or bellows) being a necessity, the same need is applied to other adapted enlarger lenses I've tried up until now, and it also applies to any traditional bellows macro lens (as expected), so I presume there's something in the Yashinon's optical formula that doesn't allow it to work in the same manner that the others do. I tried the same basic experiment on a Steinheil Munchen Cassar 100mm 4.5 in Exakta mount, and it won't focus unless it too, is on a bellows that's cranked out a fair distance. It was meant for use on a 35mm camera (as a bellows lens), and not on Minox format film as a standard taking lens. That seems to be a major factor, with the focal registration depth being vastly different from the originating camera lens's recording distance from lens to 'film' plane.
In the years, literally, I've spent in darkrooms exposing paper, it has never once occured to me to make note of the lens to film distances, and how they'd be affected in reverse. Given that fact alone only proves how one doesn't need to understand 100% of the mechanics to get good results... but I'm glad that someone managed to figure out the parts I never knew, to allow me to make prints.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 770 (71 liked)
Join date: August 2016
Status:
|
|
on Oct 26, 2021 15:42:40 GMT
Posted: Oct 26, 2021 15:42:40 GMT
For some reason, there are currently FOUR Atoron 21mm DX ENLAHEADS on EBAY right now.
And still very pricey!!!!!
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,369 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Oct 26, 2021 18:08:02 GMT
Posted: Oct 26, 2021 18:08:02 GMT
For some reason, there are currently FOUR Atoron 21mm DX ENLAHEADS on EBAY right now.
And still very pricey!!!!!
After acquiring the one I posted about, I kept an eye out for others as a saved search. It took quite a while, but an auction popped up for one several months ago, and it was complete with the box and film carrier. I didn't expect to win it with the low bid I threw in - but apparently, it was more than enough, so now I have a sibling for a similar price to the first copy. I really appreciate how sharp these are, and they're truly simple to get them mounted as taking lenses for macro work on digital., but I have no need to mount one on an enlarger. These are very specialized in purpose when used for macro work and might not find an audience at the high prices some seem to think these command. For anyone looking to buy something quickly and bypass the ridiculous asking prices, most would be better off with the Tominon 35mm f/4.5 you'd posted about in another thread, and spend a bit more for the proper mounting adapters Even hard core Yashica collectors may shy away (I did, and I won't cough up that kind of cash), and I don't know if there's any place still processing Atoron film and needs to use these for their intended purpose. Kinda like asking $900+ for a stove-heated clothes iron, when nobody wants to use them to actually iron trousers anymore.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 770 (71 liked)
Join date: August 2016
Status:
|
|
on Oct 26, 2021 21:31:21 GMT
Last Edit: Oct 26, 2021 21:38:35 GMT by xkaes
While there are a LOT of Atoron/Minox/Sharan/9.5 users out there, most of them are not wealthy -- but since most of them have to do their own processing, they would love to have the Yashica 21mm ENLA. Fortunately, for them, there are alternatives.
And for those interested in macro work, not only is the Tominon 35mm f4.5 a "steal", but there is also a Tominon 17mm f4. A list of the Tomioka process lenses would be nice, like the enlarging lens list at: www.photocornucopia.com/1061.htmlBut process lenses can be better for close-up work.
Anyone ever see a list like that anywhere?
Even just a Tomioka list would be nice!!!
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 4 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2022
Status:
|
|
on Jan 27, 2022 13:19:52 GMT
Posted: Jan 27, 2022 13:19:52 GMT
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,033 (561 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Jan 27, 2022 13:37:56 GMT
Posted: Jan 27, 2022 13:37:56 GMT
Hello 169 and welcome to the Forum! Thank you for the url to the archive; it's a very interesting project. Seeing the reference to MrCad made me smile as I used to pop into their Croydon store when interesting C/Y or medium format items appeared. Another stroll down Memory Lane...
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 4 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2022
Status:
|
|
on Jan 27, 2022 16:28:50 GMT
Last Edit: Jan 27, 2022 16:31:16 GMT by 169
Have you been to their Pimlico HQ? Alex has been in this game longer than most. Gathering lens samples over the last five years, I very often come across old boxes with MrCad sales stickers still attached. I wonder how many they've sold down the decades? DELTA is already the largest single reference for enlarger lenses - almost 1000 unique models are listed - but we recently made the decision to include copy, repro, x-ray and projector lenses according to The Four (somewhat arbitrary) Rules: 1) No internal focusing mechanisms 2) Adaptable to M42 3) Image circle > 25mm at infinity focus 4) No large format taking lenses (that would otherwise qualify under rules 1-3) All feedback is valuable. We're also looking for people to help proof DELTA before it goes fully live, and over time to chip in reviews, images of (and shot with) 'alt' lenses, etc. I don't see it going full wiki, because that opens the door to errors and inconsistencies. It will always be curated, and freely accessible, but the more (and more knowledgeable) the contributors, the better it will be for all.
We have 40 entries under a keyword search for "Tomi***" - Tomioka, Tominon, etc If we missed anything, please shout . . .
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,033 (561 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Jan 27, 2022 19:53:37 GMT
Posted: Jan 27, 2022 19:53:37 GMT
Have you been to their Pimlico HQ? Alex has been in this game longer than most. Gathering lens samples over the last five years, I very often come across old boxes with MrCad sales stickers still attached. I wonder how many they've sold down the decades? DELTA is already the largest single reference for enlarger lenses - almost 1000 unique models are listed - but we recently made the decision to include copy, repro, x-ray and projector lenses according to The Four (somewhat arbitrary) Rules: 1) No internal focusing mechanisms 2) Adaptable to M42 3) Image circle > 25mm at infinity focus 4) No large format taking lenses (that would otherwise qualify under rules 1-3) All feedback is valuable. We're also looking for people to help proof DELTA before it goes fully live, and over time to chip in reviews, images of (and shot with) 'alt' lenses, etc. I don't see it going full wiki, because that opens the door to errors and inconsistencies. It will always be curated, and freely accessible, but the more (and more knowledgeable) the contributors, the better it will be for all. We have 40 entries under a keyword search for "Tomi***" - Tomioka, Tominon, etc If we missed anything, please shout . . . Shout!!! If you check the next page of threads under LENSES you will see a lens missing from the DELTA list: the Yashica 50mm f2.8. It appears to be an enlarging or copy lens; it uses an 8-bladed aperture with a range of f2.8-f16 and is blindingly sharp. I used it to record a friend's stamp collection for his insurer. Sadly I'm unable to confirm how common these lenses were as I don't know Yashica's system for numbering them; mine range from 103xx to 821xx and I know they didn't make 70,000 of them! And to answer your most important question: No; I have yet to get to Pimlico to check out Mr Cad's new HQ but it is on my list of places to visit when I next travel to London. All I know is that his prices have risen a tad since moving to this rather expensive location...
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 4 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2022
Status:
|
|
on Jan 28, 2022 1:32:59 GMT
Posted: Jan 28, 2022 1:32:59 GMT
Good catch - thanks. Gave me the chance to overhaul the Tomioka-family lenses in v0.82. The 75/4.5 scored 88% for near-field sharpness (f5.6-8 frame-averaged) and a strong 85% for far-field sharpness, so I'd expect the 50/2.8 to hit 90% in its sweet spot. Samples incoming...
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,369 (301 liked)
Join date: February 2017
Status: Failed treatment for L.B.A. and G.A.S,
|
|
on Jan 29, 2022 19:11:54 GMT
Last Edit: Jan 31, 2022 4:02:19 GMT by lumiworx
There's one other addition - or maybe a correction - to your list... the Elgeet 90mm f/4.5 I'd shown in the earlier posts does have aperture markings, as 4.5, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, and 22. They're on the angled portion of the barrel, and shown in a macro shot taken with an ELCAN 65mm/f prototype lens. EDIT... I see that projector lenses are also included, and that ZETT lenses aren't in the list. They would be all the Zeiss Talon designs produced under their name when Zeiss sold off their Ikon projector lines, and one notable lens would be the ZETT Super Talon 90mm f/2.5. There's also the Kollmorgan Super Snaplite BX241 f/1.9 3.5 inch which doesn't have a proper 'MM' style marking (along with several more non-marked siblings), and there's a slew of Rollei Vario-Heidosmat zoom type projector lenses as well, where most were intended for the P-66 line of medium format projectors, and there are 2 very different versions of the 150mm f/3.5 lenses, with a metal barrel type, and the all-plastic model, (made by ISCO), also for the P-66 projector.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 770 (71 liked)
Join date: August 2016
Status:
|
|
on Jan 29, 2022 22:11:33 GMT
Last Edit: Jan 29, 2022 22:14:28 GMT by xkaes
I see that you've discovered my list of SUBMINI enlarging lenses (<40mm) on the SUBCLUB. It too is always under construction!
Here's some info from the LARGE FORMAT FORUM where Tominon lenses recently came up:
<<Re: Tominon Lens Specification
MP-4 Tominon lens 135 mm 4 elements 3 groups Tessar type 105 mm, the same 75 mm, 4/3 reverse Tessar type 50 mm, "6 group symmetric triplet type" I've never seen a cross-section or found a clearer explanation 35 mm, 4/3 reverse Tessar type 17 mm, 6/4 "macro lens"
OP, these are all for the MP-4. Most of the lenses for the MP-3 are Rodenstock Ysarons, also the 35/4 Eurygon. >>
I hope this helps. You've done a ton of work!!!
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 4 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2022
Status:
|
|
on Jan 30, 2022 1:53:35 GMT
Posted: Jan 30, 2022 1:53:35 GMT
That's some beautiful, specific nuggets of intel. Many thanks. I've included these corrections and suggestions into v0.84. I also noticed I'd missed the 127mm Tominon, which is almost certainly a Tessar, too. Many more PJ lenses to add. If anyone wants to chip in suggestions, or volunteer to supply a list of those not already listed, I'm all ears. Also, sorry for hijacking the thread: please shunt it elsewhere if it's become a nuisance.
|
|