Yashica FX-3 Super 2000

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

I have had an old FX-3 lying around for quite a few years and was always impressed with its light weight, nice ML lens and excellent shutter with simple three-LED meter.

When I got my Cosina Voigtlander/Bessa 21mm camera and lens I read that Cosina made the FX-3 and perhaps also made the FX-3 Super 2000. They no longer make the Bessaflex but I thought it would be nice to get a late model FX-3 Super 2000.

I found one in original box (Sticker on it reads $299) and seller writes he got it new in 2002 (I suspect it was heavily discounted).

I also wanted a lens to complement the 21mm lens on the Bessa/Voigtlander, so I got the 24mm Yashica ML. I was also able to find this lens like new in its original box and case.

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

The service manual for the FX-3 is available on line at www.scribd.com/doc/43823931/Yashica-FX-3-FX-7-Repair-Manual

New covering for the FX-3 is available here: http://www.cameraleather.com/contax_yashica/

BradS · Jul 29, 2011

I picked up a FX-3 super 2000 just before they were discontinued. I think they were made by Kyocera(?)
I love how small and light weight it is....the camera with a 50mm lens is completely stealth in my hands. I can walk around with it and nobody even notices it there. Oh, and the glass...I have the 28mm, 50mm and 43~70mm ML lenses. The primes are nothing short of fantastic and the kit zoom is just about the only zoom I've every been happy to use.

Now, I'm going to have to go dig mine out of the 35mm storage place and run a roll of film through it.

KrankyKraut · Jul 29, 2011

I have one myself and like it OK. The ML lenses are great, no doubt. The camera size, weight and simplicity are good, too. The one thing that bothers me is the loud shutter and mirror slap. Makes it too conspicuous for street photography.

Jeff Kubach · Jul 29, 2011

Looks like a great camera!

Jeff

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

BradS said:
I picked up a FX-3 super 2000 just before they were discontinued. I think they were made by Kyocera(?)

I'm still distilling the info for myself but my current understanding is that Kyocera owned Yashica and got the FX-3's from Cosina to brand as Yashica. From what I read here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosina) it indicates the FX-3 Super 2000 was also a Cosina product but, as you know, you can't believe everything you read on the internet!

On a related note, I also am under the impression that the current production Kenko branded SLR with Yashica/Contax mount is also a Cosina product. As you can see it is nearly identical to the FX-3 Super 2000. Its called the KF-3YC. I was actually looking to buy one but can't find a US distributor that can get them.

Image from here :http://www.kenkoglobal.com/kf-3yc.html

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

A few more FX-3 pictures. The FX-3 is so small it makes those two 35mm Rolleiflexes look like medium format cameras!

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

For those not familiar with these cameras, the FX-3 was a budget mechanical camera. The battery only powers the LED meter and the shutter is fully mechanical. It is, of course, manual focus.

The top of the camera is plastic and this may fool one to believe it is a poorly made product, but not at all. The FX-3 and FX-3 Super 2000 that I got are made in Japan.

Camerapedia indicates:

Later Super 2000 models were sourced from China, and some components were changed to lower costs.

Mine is serial number 85024** and indicates "Japan" on both the camera body and the original box.

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

In terms of quality longevity, we may see Contax S2 users picking up FX-3 cameras if their cameras break. The sheer numbers of FX-3s made, the high quality shutter and the ease with which they can be disassembled may produce a good supply of working cameras in the years to come. S2 owners may be hard pressed to find parts and reasonably priced replacement/spare cameras.

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

Dates of introduction:

FX-3 = 1979
FX-3 Super 2000 = 1986

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

BradS said:
the camera with a 50mm lens is completely stealth in my hands.

Especially the 50mm f2. That is almost a "pancake" lens compared to the f1.4.

ic-racer · Jul 29, 2011

Some other features the serious photographer will appreciate, that may be overlooked on this camera:

1) There is mirror lock up. It is activated by the self timer.
2) The meter is adjustable for both overall sensitivity and slope, so the perfectionist can fine tune it.
3) The meter circuit has a built in constant voltage regulator (1.25V +/- 0.15V) so it works fine with many different types of batteries (Zinc, Alkaline, Silver)
4) The meter uses Silicone Blue cells.
5) The focus mechanism and aperture rings of the ML lenses turn in the same direction as the Zeiss lenses (the correct way ).
6) It is a little bit of a tight fit but the viewfinder will accept a current-production Nikon diopter (use one marked one less than needed). This is much easier to locate than the original Contax/Yashica diopter.

ColdEye · Jul 29, 2011

It as very beautiful and it works best for people who use it for shooting instead of collecting. The 50/2 ML lens has a bokeh I like, it is like the Helios 44. The very light weight and compact size make it a very good camera to carry around.

BrianL · Jul 29, 2011

I have a pair of FX-3s sitting in the closet. My son used them and when he was barely old enough to meander and learned to shoot with them. He loved to accompany our photo group on competition shoots and did amazingly well with the 50mm/f2.0 standard lens. It held its own against all the expensive Nikons, Canons and Pentax system these guys were invested in. One of the group had a Contax RTS and also a FX-3 as a backup body.

The camera is small, light but does not feel cheap. The meters on each are dead accurate and read the same. When he gave them back well actually turned them over to me as he took the Olympus DSLR he just bught for me for Father's Day, I could not bring myself to sell them so just stored them. Maybe one day when the Bronica system becomes too heavy and I tire of using an external meter I'll pull them out, pick up a coupld of more lenses and use them.

Only weakness is the cheap covering Yashica used. It peels so easily. I covered one camera with some leather bought from a shoe repair shop for a couple of bucks, a light tan. The other body has had almost no use and the covering is still good. I would probably spring for one of the kits if it eventually needs replacing.

The Contax SLR lenses are excellent and Yashica apparently borrowed their designs and formulas in making the ML series lenses and they are quite good.

ic-racer · Jul 30, 2011

I just finished a brief inspection and cleaning of the old FX-3 I noticed something very clever that is not in the service manual.
The potentiometer that calibrates the meter is visible without taking the whole top off. After removing the rewind knob one can get to a cover washer at the base of the rewind knob cavity. Removing this cover reveals a hole in the top plate right over the little potentiometer.
Of course don't touch that if you don't know what you are dong. I was actually going to adjust this meter to match the meter on the new FX-3 Super 2000 but on inspection, found out that the little lens over the silicone blue meter cell was off kilter. After putting it back in the proper place both meters read the same.

ic-racer · Aug 8, 2011

I came across some US Dollar pricing info from the back ads of a 1986 Popular Photography magazine. The Zeiss lenses are more expensive, at about DOUBLE the price of the Yashica ML lenses. In retrospect that seems reasonable, whereas today some ebay sellers would want you to think the Ziess lenses are valued at TEN-TIMES as much.

FX-3 Body Only = $70
vs.
Nikon FM-2 Body = $240
vs.
Contax RTS II Body = $400

Some Yashica ML vs Zeiss (C/Y mount) price comparisons (1986 US Dollars):

ML 50 1.4 = $63
Planar 50 1.4 = $130

ML 35 2.8 = $55
Distagon 35 2.8 = $135

ML 28 2.8 = $58
Distagon 28 2.8 = $175

ML 24 2.8 = $85
Distagon 25 2.8 = $260

ML 21 3.5 = $200
Distagon 18 4 = $430

ML [F] 15 2.8 = $240
Distagon F 16 2.8 = $460

ic-racer · Aug 8, 2011

Another interesting comparison. If you are of the school that believes "my car is better than yours because I have twelve cylinders" then you would appreciate these lens element comparisons. BTW the Yashica "DSB" and "YUS" lenses are NOT merely single coated versions of the ML lenses. They all have different lens formulas with...you guessed it...less lens elements

ML 50 1.4 = 7 elements
Planar 50 1.4 = 7 elements

ML 35 2.8 = 7 elements
Distagon 35 2.8 = 6 elements

ML 28 2.8 = 8 elements
Distagon 28 2.8 = 7 elements
DSB 28 2.8 = 6 elements

ML 24 2.8 = 9 elements
Distagon 25 2.8 = 8 elements

ML 21 3.5 = 12 elements
Distagon 18 4 = 10 elements

ML [F] 15 2.8 = 10 elements
Distagon F 16 2.8 = 8 elements

ic-racer · Aug 8, 2011

I have MTF curves for all those Zeiss lenses but none for the ML lenses. Anyone have any for the ML lenses?? Conspiracy theory says the Yashica MTF curves are very good and therefore not made available to the public to enhance the sales of the more expensive Zeiss lenses

BrianL · Aug 8, 2011

I don't know the specs but the ML lenses I've used with my FX-3 are no slouches and the truth be known I can't think of a reason to justify spending more on a 35mm system, well slr system, excpet for the name factor. The system just does what it is supposed to do and does it well.

rythm_maker1 · Nov 12, 2011

Need help with the exposure meter FX-3 Super 2000

I've been recently using my dad's old yashica fx-3 super 2000. M using it without a flash and its works superbly in daylight. A few days back i was out taking shots. Everything was ok until i came home and clicked more pictures...the exposure meter started showing negative..first i thought it could be due to low light, but when i tried to open my lens to max., it always shows as low light in the LED meter. I dunno whats wrong..i even changed the battery, but it's still the same. For eg. In natural daylight shooting a flower, with a apperture of 3.5 and shutter 1/60 meter says it is under exposed (red)..this wasn't happening initially while taking pictures. What must be the problem???

mawz · Nov 14, 2011

They're great little cameras, if not quite as refined as later variations of the CS-1. All FX-3's have the small shutter release and lack the shutter lock, the FM10 introduced a larger release & a shutter lock which improved handling.

The base camera is the Cosina CS-1, which has two variations, a manual, mechanical camera and an aperture priority electronic shutter camera.

This camera has been sold under a number of different names. The Mechanical version was also sold as the FX-3, FX-7 (same camera in silver), Ricoh KR-5 family, Nikon FM10, Voigtlander V3000, Vivitar V4000, Voigtlander Bessaflex TM (with metal top & bottom cover), Olympus OM2000 (with selectable spot metering) and the Canon T60 (with horizontal travel shutter). They also form the basis for the mechanical Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and the Zeiss Ikon SW.

The aperture priority version was also sold as the Nikon FE10 and forms the basis of the Bessa R2A, R3A, R4A and the Zeiss Ikon. There may have been other variations as well.

Karl C · Apr 2, 2012

As a longtime Canon user, looking for some forum feedback on an idea I have.

For years, I shot with a Canon AE-1 Program (black body, of course! ). Today, I shoot with a 5D and am looking for an inexpensive film SLR for B&W photography.

I'm torn between the Canon A-1 with the 50mm f/1.4 lens and a Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 with the 50mm f/1.9 ML lens. While I love Canon, two selling points for the Yashica is the 1/2000 max shutter (Canon is 1/1000) and the ability to use C/Y mount Zeiss lenses. Also, I've read where the Yashica metering is very good.

The Canon system would be $125 or so and I get pick-up the Yashica system for less than $50, not that that is a huge difference in costs.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

pstake · Apr 2, 2012

I tend to use only C/Y equipment so I guess I'm biased. The ML lenses are generally accepted as superior to Canon FD lenses. Certain focal lengths are considered by some to be on par with their Zeiss counterparts (notably the 28 2.8 and the 24 ML versus the Distagon 25.)

As for the camera bodies, there was a recent thread about the Contax 139Q, in which many people chimed in to support the FX-3. Do a search and you should find it. I'm sure the A-1 is a sound camera, but the FX-3 is simple precision and durability. Its meter, as you've heard, is very good. Good enough that I have no qualms about leaving my Gossen at home when I take out my FX-3 (or my FX-2, for that matter.)

Yashica FX-3 Super 2000

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency