Cheap and good C/Y lenses

[zozur]

Hello
I just bought Yashica FR 1 camera, with motor drive. I like shutter button and diagonal split screen. I'm little worry that it is electronic, not mechanical camera, but I think that are other mechanical for that mount?
What lens do you recommend to that "system"? I now that Zeiss are good but probably also expensive.

 

[blockend]

Hello
I just bought Yashica FR 1 camera, with motor drive. I like shutter button and diagonal split screen. I'm little worry that it is electronic, not mechanical camera, but I think that are other mechanical for that mount?
What lens do you recommend to that "system"? I now that Zeiss are good but probably also expensive.

The FR is one of my favourite cameras, I haven't use the FR 1 but it's basically the same with the addition of auto exposure. The FR II is a more simplified full auto model.

The camera has few vices with the exception of a frame counter that, if it isn't already broken, will fail soon after you've bought it. The shutter is also a bit loud, but not exceptionally so for SLRs of its era. The body is very solid, quite attractive to my eyes and suffers none of the soft-touch disintegration of the Contax RTS - also made by Kyocera. The FR's have full shutter and aperture read out in the finder. Also a large and well placed shutter button and a nice rear light meter switch that turns off automatically when its pressed.

Yashica lenses were single coated DSB or multicoated ML, and they are very good optically and in build quality. The range is extensive but the more unusual focal lengths are harder to find than Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc. In my tests there's very little between single and coated versions in sharpness, though highlights are rendered slightly differently. Contax lenses are lovely but expensive, not least because digital camera users have realised they out-perform their modern optics costing two or three times as much.

 

[locutus]

The Zeiss 50's, f/1.7 and f/1.4 are seriously good and relatively affordable, ~100 to 150 euros.

They also have that real Zeiss look which leads to further temptation...

 

[Neal]

Dear zozur,

Any of the prime lenses from Yashica with the MC or ML designation are great values. I have no experience with the zooms. One Yashica lens that is a favorite of mine is the 135mm f/2.8 YUS lens. The coatings are not up to the ML/MC or Contax T* lenses but it is so compact that convenience outweighs bench test comparisons. If I am just going to walk around I prefer it to my Contax 135mm lens.

Neal Wydra

 

[Paul Howell]

In the 80s a woman i was dating gave me a Yashica FX with a 3 lens kit, why I dont know, at the time I was a working PJ and had a F3P Canon 7 and Leica IIIG with lens. I did test the lens, the 50mm 1.7 or 1.8 was rather good, I could tell much if any differance from my Nikkor 50mm, the 35 to 70 was a 3.5 to 4, at F8 it was sharp, flare was an issue, the 70 to 200 was a disappointment, very soft in the corners. When we broke up she wanted it all back, it was as good as new, I had only shot 1 roll.

 

[Fixcinater]

The Planar 50/1.4 focuses much closer than the Planar 50/1.7 but both are very impressive optics, more so than any of the Yashica primes I have had.

 

[elcabezagrande]

Personally, I would stay away from the DSB lenses, as every single one that I have ever used has had oily aperture blades. C/Y lenses can also be found with the "YUS" (Yashica U.S.) brand, while these are clones of the DSB lenses, the examples that I have owned have not had the oily aperture problem, and the YUS 135/2.8 was a very good lens.

The ML 50/2 lens is among the best bargains in lens-land, while everyone buys it'd faster cousins, this gem slips through the cracks. Unless you absolutely must have the fastest glass available, I highly recommend it.

 

[elcabezagrande]

Hello
I just bought Yashica FR 1 camera, with motor drive. I like shutter button and diagonal split screen. I'm little worry that it is electronic, not mechanical camera, but I think that are other mechanical for that mount?

The FX-2, FX-3, and FX-7 are all fully mechanical, outside of the meter, as is the Contax S2.

 

[ic-racer]

'ML' lenses. I have all the ML wide angles and most of the Zeiss wide angles. The ML lenses can be a good value.

 

[jjphoto]

...What lens do you recommend to that "system"? I now that Zeiss are good but probably also expensive.

Everyone has different tastes so maybe there's no point recommending any lenses unless you tell us what types of pictures you like to take, and probably your budget too. I've had quite a few Yashica ML and Contax lenses over the years and found most of the ML lenses quite good but never really as good as the Contax equivalents, maybe some of the 50mm lenses were pretty close.

I had a terrible ML 200mm lens but maybe it was a dud, I only had one copy. That's probably the worst Yashica ML lens I've ever had.
The ML 21mm is very good stopped down, not great wide open, but they are not cheap anymore.
The ML 24 is quite good too, I think they are reasonably priced.
The ML 2.8/55 macro is very good, but again there are better macros from Zeiss, but it's a nice lens and certainly one I would recommend.
The ML 2/50 is good considering it's only worth 10 or 20 dollars, but the way I look at photography is that my time is worth more than that so if I go to the effort to take a particular picture I prefer to think I'm doing it with the best tools for the job that I can afford, and I would suggest that most people can afford more than $20 dollars for a lens. I don't recall if it's rendering/bokeh is particularly jittery which can be an advantage if used the right way. None of the Yashica ML or Contax 50mm lenses strike me as having soft background bokeh.
The ML 1.4/50 has a similar rendering to the Contax/Zeiss 1.4/50 but the ML has more purple fringing and is a little less sharp at every aperture. It's not a bad lens but I find I never use it any more because I prefer the Contax 1.4/50.
I love the Contax 2/135 (I've had two over the years) although this is not a cheap lens. It is very sharp even wide open and has possibly the softest background bokeh of any lens. It really is superb for photographing people, however it is not as well corrected as modern equivalents, nor is it priced that way. I suspect the cine guys would love it too, because of it's bokeh, and I've done some timelapse with it on a DSLR with stepper motor controlled focus which were very effective, again because of the sharpness combined with the soft bokeh.
I've had the Contax 1.4/85 but I didn't love that lens, maybe others do.
Same for the Contax 2.8/180.
The Contax 2.8/28mm lenses are superb and not too expensive. I definitely recommend the Contax 2.8/28 if you like that focal length.

 

[ic-racer]

 

[naaldvoerder]

The C/Y 85/2.8 is a little known gem.

 

[dynachrome]

I have not had much luck tracking down a 35/2.8 ML so I might just get a 35/2.8 Zeiss lens instead. In the ML range I have a 28/2.8, two 50/1.7s, a few 50mm f/1.9 and f/2 lenses, a 55/2.8 Macro, the early and late 135/2.8 models, the early and late 200/4 models, an 80-200/4 and two 42-75s. The other Yashica lenses are DSB, YUS and MC models. I have adapters for using M42 lenses, Vivitar TX lenses (T4 w/M42 mount and adapter), T lenses and Tamron Adaptall II lenses. I had a 50/2.8 Sigma Macro before I got the 55/2.8 ML. Both are good but the Sigma goes to 1:1 without the need for extra extension. I have used a 90/2.5 Tamron SP (52BB). My preference is for the FX-3 cameras. Once overhauled they seem to work well. I avoid the FR series cameras. If you have one that works, you're just lucky. I am waiting to get an overhauled FX-3 back along with a 28/2 Kiron.

 

[Jan-Peter]

Dear Zozur;

you made a good choice with the Yashica FRI. - I have had two bodies since 1979 and 1980 and took analogue BW- and transperancy films, several hundreds - and both bodies are still working well.

Concerning lenses: Over all these many years I use several Carl Zeiss lenses, such as 4/18mm, 2,8/35 mm (this is super-sharp, also using 2,8!), 1,4/50 mm (also fine!), 1,4/85mm (a great lens, too!), 2,8/135, 3,5/200mm, 28-70mm (with visible distortion) and the 80-200 (which is also very sharp, even using 4,0!!).

Thus I cannot help you much, however wish you plentty of fun and good photos!

Jan-Peter

 

[blockend]

2,8/35 mm (this is super-sharp, also using 2,8!)

Yes, the 2.8 35mm ML is a lovely lens. My copy has slight fungus inside the front element, but the overall rendition is such that I keep using it in preference to better condition lenses. The 35mm is quite hard to find but worth the hunt as it's very sharp.

 

[RobC]

I love my zeiss 135 2.8. The bokeh it gives is to die for. And my zeiss 85 1.4 is pretty darn good too.