Lenses for Yashica FX-3 Super 2000

[Anna Zoe]

Hey guys,

I have been using a Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 with a Yashica ML Zoom 35-70mm 1:3,5 - 4,8 lense. I usually shoot people and so far I am very happy with this camera-lense-combo when it comes to close-ups and portraits. However, as soon as the person stands a couple of metres further away (e.g. full body shot) the results don‘t get as sharp as I like them to be and honestly quite low in quality.

I am new to the whole lense game so I was wondering what kind of lense could be the answer to my problem - like focal length, aperture wise etc. I would also appreciate any kind of suggestions for a specific lense (certain Carl Zeiss, …)

Also, as far as I understood any T* lense of CZ should fit on the body of my Yashica, right? Or are there other parameters that I have to keep in mind?

Thank you for your help! Take Care

 

[ic-racer]

the results don‘t get as sharp as I like them to be and honestly quite low in quality.

Is the image in sharp focus on the focusing screen?

 

[Anna Zoe]

Is the image in sharp focus on the focusing screen?

As far as I am concerned yes

 

[ic-racer]

In that case the focus issue would be with the camera body, not the lens.

 

[Paul Howell]

Berry Thornton's Book the Edge of Darkness describes how to test if what you see in the viewfinder matches what is in focus on the film. Yashica and Contax share the same mount. As Yashica lens are pretty good, before buying a Zeiss lens I would find copy of Thornton's book and test your camera.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Also, as far as I understood any T* lense of CZ should fit on the body of my Yashica, right? Or are there other parameters that I have to keep in mind?

The lens has to be in Contax/Yashica mount. Zeiss (Oberkochen and Jena) made lenses for 35mm SLRs in other mounts. They won't fit your Super 2000. There are also third party lenses in C/Y mount.

 

[Anna Zoe]

In that case the focus issue would be with the camera body, not the lens.

But when I do portraits etc. they come out pretty good! If there was an issue with the body that would not be the case right?

 

[wjlapier]

The Zeiss 45mm Tessar is plenty sharp maybe too sharp for people.

 

[Anna Zoe]

The lens has to be in Contax/Yashica mount. Zeiss (Oberkochen and Jena) made lenses for 35mm SLRs in other mounts. They won't fit your Super 2000. There are also third party lenses in C/Y mount.

Okay, so that means that I have to make sure it says for Contax and Yashica specifically? So the T* does not matter? I found CZ lenses that are supposed to be for Yashica and Contax so they do exist, right?

 

[BobD]

The T* doesn't have anything to do with the lens mount. Your camera uses Contax/Yashica mount lenses aka C/Y mount. Such lenses were made under the Zeiss and Yashica brand names as well as a number of third party brands such as Vivitar, Tamron, etc

Zeiss and Yashica also made lenses in other mounts that won't fit your camera directly (though adapters may exist to allow them to fit).

 

[Anna Zoe]

Just went through the photos of concern and it might be an issue of false (too high) expectations. I have attached an image where I feel like ist should be more crisp than it is.

 

[ic-racer]

I use the Yashica ML lenses on my Yashica cameras, rather than the Carl Zeiss lenses. I can't say that any of these lenses have ever failed to produce a sharp image when asked of it.
(...and I also have the Zeiss lenses in 50/1.4, 28/2, 35/2.8, 18/4 and 16/2.8 to compare side by side).

 

[Dan Fromm]

Okay, so that means that I have to make sure it says for Contax and Yashica specifically? So the T* does not matter? I found CZ lenses that are supposed to be for Yashica and Contax so they do exist, right?

T* indicates coating of some sort. All modern lenses are coated. Irrelevant, except perhaps for zooms and some w/a lenses, so check for multicoating. T*'s meaning has changed since it was introduced. First, what we now call single coated. Then dropped when all lenses were coated and the differentiation became meaningless. Later resurrected to mean multi-coated.

Yes Contax/Yashica specifically. Contax is a Zeiss trade name, was applied to many cameras including SLRs, with different lens mounts.

 

[ic-racer]

Even stopped down, the Tessar may be noticeably blurry at the corners when compared to the Planar, especially if you print full frame.

 

[Paul Howell]

Your lens is a kit lens, pretty good, as entry level zoom you have experience issues when shooting wide open, also the shutter speed may drop too low for the camera to be hand held. What to understand about Zeiss and for matter Leica lens is that both companies tested their lens on Microfiche film, when tested on microfiche Zeiss lens tested with greater resolution than other top brands, but in the real word, a lens only need to resolve 200 LMM which is Tmax 100. I pretty sure your Yaschia lens will do that without an issue.

This is just a guess, but because Yaschia was in partnership with Zeiss they did not produce a top of the line pro quality lens line like Canon L or Pentax LE, for a top of the line lens with a really good coating, great contrast, color retention and outstanding build quality you might want to think about a Zeiss, just be prepared to pay.

 

[George Mann]

The Zeiss 45mm Tessar is plenty sharp maybe too sharp for people.

All of this series is for me. I prefer the Yashica's.

 

[George Mann]

Just went through the photos of concern and it might be an issue of false (too high) expectations. I have attached an image where I feel like ist should be more crisp than it is. View attachment 278591

This looks like a poor consumer level scan.

 

[Paul Howell]

Yashica made 4 or 5 zooms in the 35 to 70 range, in addition the ML they made one MC, multi coated which I assume is their version of Zeiss's T coating. In addition to the 3.5 to 4.8 Yashica made a 3.5 to 4 and a straight 3.5 in ML. Yashica also made a wide range of prime lens that should run much less than Zeiss lens. In addition an early Vivitar Series One in the same range will be sharp, the 28 to 90 2.8 to 3.5 gets good reviews. I could not a listing for any Zeiss zooms in C/Y mount, only primes.

 

[reddesert]

T* as others have said just indicates a type of coating. The Carl Zeiss lenses were made for the Contax line. They tend to be kind of pricey. The Yashica ML lenses are good. You may find that single-focal-length lenses offer somewhat higher quality and allow you to shoot at a higher shutter speed for easier hand-holding. My first SLR was a Yashica FX-3 with an ML 50/2 and the images were always good (except for when I was the problem).

There are Yashica lenses for the C/Y mount that came before the ML series, mostly called DSB, but the caveat here is that I've found that the DSB lenses frequently have a sticky aperture. There are also even older Yashica lenses for the M42 screw mount, mostly labeled Yashinon - these can be good but they won't fit your camera.

 

[MFstooges]

Just went through the photos of concern and it might be an issue of false (too high) expectations. I have attached an image where I feel like ist should be more crisp than it is.

Your shutter speed might be too low, looks like the subject was not really still. The rattan chairs were dead still and it is sharper than the subject. The grass on the background were moving too.

 

[ts1000]

@Anna Zoe , I agree with @MFstooges.
The lack of sharpness is due to you not using tripod and having a shutter speed too slow -- so the effect of your hands shaking (or subject moving) are amplified when you zoom in.

Basically, when the subject is further away and you are zooming in -- any kind of hand shake will cause more blurriness.
Because everything is 'more magnified'. So any tiny shake in hands, (or by the subject) will cause more blurring (then at the closer distance, at the same shutter speed).
This is also why majority of telephoto (high zoom factor) lenses are shot using a tripod (or using image stabilization -- but this is not available for old film cameras/lenses).

you have several choices to correct this:

a) add a flash light (like a vivitar 283), set it on blue, set lens to f/8 (or f/4) and set shutter speed at 1/125.
Ask the subject to stay steady, and you can use your hands to hold the camera (because 1/125 shutter speed allows it).

b) use tripod. Set your camera shutter 1/30 or /1/60, use the lens aperture your like. Ask the subject to stay steady, no movement.

c) use a faster speed film to allow you set shutter speed to 1/125 or faster. But then you will have to accept more grain.

d) use a 135 /2.8 lens (yashica-ML, zeiss variety, or yashica-DSB (that's not as good as the other 2 types).
set the aperture to 2.8 (or 3.5) -- that will let more light into the lens, so that you can up the shutter speed to 1/125 and still get enough light for a good exposure in not-so-sunny day.

e) shoot when it is very sunny, so that you can up the shutter speed to 1/125 or above to reduce the possiblity of hand shaking affecting your photo.


A flash or a tripod (or both) are the two things that dramatically improved the sharpness of my film 35mm photography.
More than trying different lenses/etc.

I use Yashica FX-3 (but I do not have a zoon lens, so only inexpensive DSB prime lenses) -- and it is a reasonably reliable camera with consistent shutter speeds.
I am thinking to get a m42 to C/Y adapter to allow me to mount a variety of M42 (screw mount) lenses on that camera. But I have not tried that yet (at it may cause the camera to loose auto aperture function).