Yashica 50mm F1.7 M42 mount

vroger · Expire: 2016-10-21

A fellow MF member sent me this Yashica 50mm F1.7 M42 mount, as they were not using it. Taken with my EOS-M.

I did bump up the clarity in lightroom, and apply some noise reduction on these. if anyone wants to see originals, I will post them.

I can say I am really impressed with the lens even though I have only taken a couple shots with it. I'll post more as I get time and better weather.

Oldhand · Posted: Mon May 04, 2015 1:45 am Post subject:

Looks like a good lens.
Is it the DX version Roger?
OH

vroger · Expire: 2016-10-21

Oldhand · Posted: Mon May 04, 2015 2:16 am Post subject:

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Actually there is no really bad lens in existance in 50mm focus length at a similar maximum aperture from any of the known camera manufacturers from this times. I've found an old German test magazine for photographic equipment from 1985 and they tested all known 50mm lenses very intensive. Of course, there are minor differences in the testing and measurements, but nothing of that is really visible in the real picture.
Only 2 lenses out of 17 tested ones, namely the Pentacon 1.8/50 and the Exakta 1.8/50 are below average when fully open outside the center of the picture. The Exakta (made in Japan) is the worst lens of all tested ones, even at F5.6 far below average.
All others are ALL between very good and excellent. Especially when stopped down to F5.6.
Insteresting is, that the best overall score at F5.6 was given to the EBC X-Fujinon 50mm/F1.6 and the Yashica Lens 50mm/F1.7 was slightly better than the Zeiss Planar 50mm/F1.7. The Leica Summicron-R 50mm/F2.0 was in the middle field below the Yashica.
However, as I stated earlier, I doubt that you will see any differences in real life, except maybe for the Exakta lens, especially when fully open. The main differences are in the corners of the pictures in sharpness and contrast. In the middle almost every lens was perfect.
Actually it's time to get an adapter for my 1.6/50 Fujinon. Wink

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

@tb_a

Thanks for your report, very interesting. Could you scan it and post it here? many people would be interested.

However there is more than the sharpness and shooting the charts.
It is true that you can take great pictures with ANY of them.
Very known ant tested formula made them very similar.

As you know there are many differences between lenses which MIGHT be important for some

* handling/build
* flare resistance /coating
* drawing of out of focus areas / number of blades /shape of highlights ....[did I mention bokeh here?]
* color rendition
* contrast
* minimal focus distance
* vignetting
* CA

Cheers,
Rado

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

The later ML 50 1.7 is one of my favourite 50's. It's perfectly true that 50mm lenses are remarkably good, the camera makers sold their cameras with a 50mm and it would have been suicidal to sell a bad lens with a camera. But there are differences, my Yashica seems cooler than the Minoltas, or the Minolta seems warmer? And bokeh is different. The Yashica is just one of those lenses that does exactly what you ask it to do, and the results aren't that 'different' to other good lenses to make it stand out.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Rado,

Well, I don't promise anything yet. It's more than 20 pages and of course in GERMAN. This is an English forum.

I know very well what the difference between a good and a bad lens is. I'm not in photography since yesterday. I started more than 40 years ago to make my own pictures from scratch.

However, If a lens fails to deliver sharp and contrasty pictures it may have still it's supporters, but it's not of interest for me any longer.

This test report concentrates on technical specifications and objective measurements concerning sharpness, contrast, vignetting and distortion. That's all. Chromatic aberration was not in existence 1985. Subjective voodoo criterias like bokeh and color rendition are not even mentioned in this report. You have to be aware that 1985 digital photography didn't even exist and the colors have been influenced primarily by the used film and not the lens.

The main differences of this 50mm standard lenses I already mentioned in short: They are almost NOT in existence, besides this unlucky Exakta 1.8 lens, which drops out even at F5.6.

ALL others: Canon FD 1.8, Minolta MD 1.7, Nikon Nikkor 1.8, SMC Pentax-A 1.7, Zeiss Planar T* 1.7, Konica Hexanon AR 1.8, Leitz Summicron-R 2.0, Olympus Zuiko Auto-S 1.8, Ricoh Rikenon 1.7, Auto Chinon 1.7, EBC X-Fujinon 1.6, Nikon Serie E 1.8, Pentacon 1.8, Petri MC 1.7, Rollei-HFT-Planar 1.8 and Yashica Lens ML 1.7 are more or less equal with minimal differences in the corners wide open.

The technical specifications of mentioned lenses are easily research-able on internet. The testing result which I stated here you have for the time being to believe or not. Whatever you prefer. When it comes to subjective criterias the world is falling apart anyway. It's somehow comparable with the discussion between HiFi freaks whether this or that cable has any influence on the quality of the sound. Therefore I consider such findings as "voodoo". I didn't met ever any "expert" in my life who was able to judge on the basis of such subjective criterias (without former knowledge of the concerned lens) which lens it may be. Same is true with cables in "blind"-tests concerning HiFi. However, in photography the term "blind"-test would be definitely wrong. I don't know how to name it. Wink

My English is not that perfect.

Thanks for your understanding.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

Hi Thomas,

don't worry about your english, it is great [I am not native english speaker eaither]

I am very interestesd in these old tests, I have collected some over the years from different foras and internet websites.
I think they are relevant, even if they had been done in "analogue era". However soem magazine/test can say something different than the other.

You must agree that there is more to lenses than the tests from that magazine.
Although I started posting here just recently I am reading this forum for donkeys years.

I own all the lenses tested in your magazine (apart Nikkors, who are too expensive comparing with their peers)

Here are some examples:

I don't like C/Y Planar 50/1.7 because long MFD (0.6m)

I like lots of Minolta lenses for their bokeh and colours even you call it woodoo, I like their build quality too, how they feel in the hand,but I don't like their strong contrast in sunny days and they can't be used with my helicoid adapter (sony--> canon EOS)

I like my Zenitar-M 50/1.7- for its bokeh rendition and subtle skin tones it produces

I like Auto Chinon 55/1.7 for but flares badly -even with hood -more than others.

do you know what I mean?

Over the year or so I have been doing subjectively objective and objectively subjective test with thirty two 50mm f1.4 (1.7s later) lenses testing lots of things incl. woodoo aspects-will be posted over the summer.

cheers,
rado

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

with so many lenses falling into the very good category, we turn to voodoo to make our choice. Wink

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Hi Rado,

I fully understand what you mean and I didn't say that I will never do that. The first problem is that my document scanner is not able to scan magazines, the second problem is that my flat bed scanner lies somewhere in an unknown moving box as I didn't use it since I moved to my present home and thirdly I do not want to destroy the magazine. However, most of it is in plain text German. There I can't help you anyway.

Sometimes I am a little bit ironic. That's my nature. Therefore I called the subjective criterias "voodoo". I don't know you but I accept your explanation for the features you are looking for. Unfortunately most of this will not be answered by the test report, except the MFD and an overall description of the lenses besides the hard facts I already mentioned before.

I am not a heavy writer in forums like this but I am reading the stuff also since ages. Sometimes I'm getting a little bit nervous when folks are discussing about subjective impressions of this or that lens mounted on a crap camera, not even knowing the basics of photography. Maybe I've been a little bit rude because of that as I was under the impression that you wanted to learn me something about the subject. That is really not necessary. I've done my home work more than sufficiently. I bought this magazines new 30 years ago and found them recently again. Although I am somehow also a little bit fanatic, always on the search for the perfect picture, my energy goes up and down. Obviously I'm back in the subject for the time being but I don't know how long it will last. However, I also want to sort out my collection and try to narrow it down as I lost already control of it. I have simply too many lenses, cameras and related equipment. Therefore I was also looking for some guideline to assist the selection of some keepers in order to sell the unneeded items.

Looking forward to learn from your findings. I am sure that I have some of the lenses too. Maybe I will do something similar.

Have a good night.

WNG555 · Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA

The Yashica DS 50 f1.7 is a great rendering lens. You're going to really enjoy it.
I found the DS 50 f2.0 and liked it so much, I picked up the f1.7 too.

The DS replaced the previous DX series. DS was still single-coated. The was following by DS-M for multi-coated. There was a DSB line released as the affordable line, but they are subpar unlike other brands' 2nd line that were very good. ie. Minolta Celtic and Nikon Series-E.

Eventually, M42 was replaced with C/Y and the DS-M was replaced by the ML. This was their best version.

The DS f1.7 you have utilizes a radioactive lens element, BTW. Thought you should know. It can yellow the glass.
The f2 is great, renders wonderful photos, but the f1.7 is even sharper and the bokeh is greater. It has a warmer cast than the f2.

It's as sharp as my MD Rokkor-X f1.7. A bit less sharp than a Super Takumar 55 f1.8.

Oh yes, throw a hood onto the front, it'll help with flare and contrast.

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

Dear Thomas,

thanks for your reply,don't worry about the scanning, to be honest I was automatically thinking that there will be some charts or numbers to look at.

...my whole point was that although these test are relevant, there is more to the lens than 4 measurements

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Hi Rado,

Although my overall number of lenses is also beyond 100 I have spread it more over different focus lengths. So my task will be a lot easier than yours. I don't know the number by heart, but only about more than 30 lenses are in the 50mm range, what you call "nifty fifties". The rest is starting with 8mm and ending with 600mm in the 35mm film leage. Luckily there are no doubles in the middle format division within a single system. However, the question is here whether to keep or sell a whole system.

My problem in general is that I tend to collect things. The collection of photo equipment is not my only passion.

Anyhow, I wish you good luck with your testing and for myself I wish to take the hurdle to avoid buying even more stuff and rather start selling items. But my problem is more of psychological nature. Wink

Thanks for your hints.

Cheers,

Lee|Ratters · Joined: 23 Sep 2014 Posts: 78 Location: Bristol | UK

Of all the 50mm lenses I've tried I found the ML50/1.7 [in C/Y mount obviously] to be the 'best' in terms of sharpness, contrast & OOF rendering & my favourite by a fair margin Smile

Hence it's the only 50mm I've kept Smile

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

You have made me so curious now that I have just ordered my first Yashica lens, namely the ML 50mm/F1.7. Unfortunately I had also to order an respective adapter for it in order to enable the use on my cameras.
Up to now I have only the Yashica Electro 35 RF-camera which is equipped with a fixed Yashinon DX 45mm/F1.7 lens which is not bad either.
The other adapter for my X-Fujinon 50mm/F1.6 is already on the way.
So I will have the two best lenses of the test mentioned earlier in this thread ready to use on most of my cameras hopefully very soon. Wink

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

I don't think you will be disappointed Thomas, but you might feel puzzled, you might wonder what the fuss is all about ? All my Yashica lenses just do the job very well. There's no spectacular bokeh, the colours are true rather than saturated, there's little CA and the pictures are sharp. they are the Toyota's of photography.

newst · Joined: 21 Oct 2014 Posts: 617 Location: Troy, MI USA

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Oldhand · Posted: Thu May 07, 2015 1:53 am Post subject:

If Roger does not mind, I will add a couple of images snapped this morning in the back yard in very windy conditions.
These are from the DX version of this lens.
Some at f1.7 and some not - you will be able to tell.
Cheers
OH

WNG555 · Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA

Outstanding images, Oldhand! I really like No.4.

Similar bokeh and sharpness from my DS f1.7. But color is a shade warmer.

I like my DS's so much, decided to try a DX f2.0 I found for cheap. It's the polished Al body version. I would've bought for the looks alone!

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Oldhand, very nice pictures indeed.
I was never a big fan of Yashica because I didn't like their cameras, when I stepped into SLR photography some decades ago and if my memory serves me right, their lenses (besides this famous 50mm ones we already discussed in detail) have never been amongst the best of the rather popular camera makers at least according several lens tests I have studied in the 70's and 80's of the last century. I've more seen Yashica as the cheap and rather low quality version of the Contax series at that time and never gained interest again until I've found this article recently about this famous ML 50mm lens. Contax was financially out of reach for me at that time anyway. So I ended up with Minolta after a short happening with the Fujica AX-Series, which disappointed me for their limited selection of lenses and accessories, but not for their equipment as such. Up to now Minolta is my favorite SLR-line and I bought only Sony bodies without lenses so far. Some years ago I started after the introduction of affordable digital SLR cameras and finally after the invention of the mirrorless ones to built up some other series additionally (M42, PK, Leica, etc.). However, I am looking forward to my first Yashinon lens. Wink

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

A couple from the ML 50 1.7

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

I'm coming kind of late to this discussion. Just noticed it. I have the subject lens. Picked it up in a pawn shop a while back for either 5 or 10 bucks. All I've used mine for so far has been self portraits. I was trading back and forth between the Yashica and a Helios 44M. The Yashica's photos were noticeably better than those of the Helios. I was a bit surprised by this. Even double checked my results by shooting more photos, but the Yashica still came out on top. It is really a nice, sharp lens, probably at least equal to my equivalent Takumar.