Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

omeone tell me an opinion on this lens.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 8:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
aoleg wrote:
Excalibur wrote:
erm Ok! What do Yashica lenses have that Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus etc etc haven't got? And if Yashica lenses had some advantage why didn't other makes copy it?


I've seen at least one fake Yashica ML lens (and quite a few fake Zeiss lenses). How many Nikon or Canon or Olympus fakes have you seen? Smile


Ah! That would suggest that they are scarce and expensive not necessarily better than say a Canon FD lens going for peanuts.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
just my 2c I have the 28mm and the 35mm The 35mm is superb the 28mm is pretty good. I had the 50 1.4 and sold it as I prefered the warmer tones of the contax but resolution they were on a par with each other, in a quick test wide open I would say it performed slightly better than the contax


PostPosted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I know this is a old tread but i had to comment ..i have a yashinon -DX 35mm f 2.8 in M42 i believe its a later one with the non diamond pattern focus ring, and its the only lens i have had to out resolve may Canon 5Dc
My test imagers was of a church at F8 and if i keep zooming in on screen some small leaded windows with diagonal lead, the lead just stay sharp until they pixelated ...they are only 1 to 2 pixel wide!!


PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2013 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi,

this Thread is older but I want to clear things up regarding the origin of the "ML 35mm".

Tokina 35mm 2.8 (very old / I had one in 1988) = Hoya HMC 35mm = Yashica ML 35mm 2.8.

Japanese optical companies often shared lens designs between each other ( free, oem or licensed).
The Yashica ML 35mm 2.8 is a nice standard 3rd Party Design but "IT IS NOT" based on Zeiss Distagon.

Just compare the "lens designs" and you will see it.

cheers

aykman


PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2013 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Aykman wrote:
Hi,

this Thread is older but I want to clear things up regarding the origin of the "ML 35mm".

Tokina 35mm 2.8 (very old / I had one in 1988) = Hoya HMC 35mm = Yashica ML 35mm 2.8.

Japanese optical companies often shared lens designs between each other ( free, oem or licensed).
The Yashica ML 35mm 2.8 is a nice standard 3rd Party Design but "IT IS NOT" based on Zeiss Distagon.

Just compare the "lens designs" and you will see it.

cheers

aykman


How can you be sure that the Yashica ML is a Tokina? I agree that the Hoya is deffo a Tokina though.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2013 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It probably is Tokina based, several Yashica ML appear to be, but the ML coatings are unique (from the Tokina RMC & Hoya HMC versions) and coatings can make a big difference to the final output.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I tested both time ago and was under impression Yashica has more contrast and edge sharpness. Both are very good lenses.
Some large photos: http://forum.mflenses.com/coffee-break-with-maya-and-yashica-ml-2-8-35mm-nex-c3-t51520.html


PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 6:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a NOS example of the 35 2.8 labeled Auto Yashinon-DX, very very sharp lens, amazing IQ in my example at least, may have something to do with the steller condition, the guy I bought it from owned it since new and had never used it due to a switch to MF from his electro right after he purchased it... Anyway, is there a difference between the optical formula of my lens and the ML version? I'd be interested to know, I also have the 50 1.4 DX and 50 1.7 from the same guy, same basic condition although those 2 saw more use.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
jimithing616 wrote:
I have a NOS example of the 35 2.8 labeled Auto Yashinon-DX, very very sharp lens, amazing IQ in my example at least, may have something to do with the steller condition, the guy I bought it from owned it since new and had never used it due to a switch to MF from his electro right after he purchased it... Anyway, is there a difference between the optical formula of my lens and the ML version? I'd be interested to know, I also have the 50 1.4 DX and 50 1.7 from the same guy, same basic condition although those 2 saw more use.


Almost certainly a different design. I think a lot of Yashinon lenses came from Tomioka. The DX lenses were actually the budget range with the DS models being more upscale. At some point multi-coating was introduced to create the DS-M line which should be the cream of the crop, but all are good solid lenses and (the copies I've had) beautifully made.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi, i own quite a few yashica ML, must say the shorter ranges are better in my opinion, i have the 28mm, 35, 50 1.9, 50 1.4, 135,200. all ML.

my favorite is the ML 50 1.4, super sharp but a little in the cool side and a little soft wide open. then the 35 2.8 ML i love to use on crop sensor i find it very sharp also, the 135 is ok and the 200 i never use. the 50 1.9 ML is also a very good performer and i feel it doesnt lose sharpenes wide open. the 28 i have to test a bit more but seems ok.

here is a picture with the 35: http://500px.com/photo/7266293


PostPosted: Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sburley wrote:
Almost certainly a different design. I think a lot of Yashinon lenses came from Tomioka.

Considering that Tomioka became part of the Yashica and later on Kyocera concern, this would not surprise me at all.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 30, 2013 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
sburley wrote:
Almost certainly a different design. I think a lot of Yashinon lenses came from Tomioka. The DX lenses were actually the budget range with the DS models being more upscale. At some point multi-coating was introduced to create the DS-M line which should be the cream of the crop, but all are good solid lenses and (the copies I've had) beautifully made.


DX line isn't budget. It's just older. Lenses are very well made. No cheap materials used. Those chromed variations really are top-notch.


PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent lens. Wide open showed bad large fringing on high contrast edges on my GH2. My test chart was 40:1 or 80:1 iirc.

f/4 and it was gone and cleaned up. Got about ~110 lp/mm on it at f/4 on my GH2.

I got a whole set (28, 35, 50/1.4, 90 2.5 tamron sp 1:1, 135/2.Cool for $10 each missed the 20mm because someone grabbed it as I was pulling out cash for it soon as I put it down.

Thought they were meh lenses until I took the filters off them. Then they were excellent.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Yashica ML 35/2.8 is like the 28/2.8 the "Poor mans Zeiss" prime lens, way good, and close to the Distagon 35/2.8, 28/2.8 versions.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hmmm. My experience of the yashica ML35, admittedly based on just one sample, Places it as the worst ML lens I've tried. Far worse than the 28ML, 21ML, 50/1.7, indeed I'd rather shoot the 35-105ML.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's doesn't make sense to judge a lens, from perhaps one broken or bad copy. I do own 3 of them, and they're quite good, the 35/2.8 is better than the 28/2.8 ML. Check out the reviews onto the net, flickr pages or fredmiranda for instance, the lens is way good. Perhaps your copy is decentered or something else. I do own also copies from the 50/1.4, 50/1.7, 24/2.8, 28/2.8 ML Primes and 28-50/3.5 & 28-85/3.5-4.5 ML, also 35-70/3.5-5.6 ML Zoom. I also have their counterparts from Contax Zeiss, also the Contax Zeiss 35/2.8 Distagon MMJ type - yes, it's a bit neglible sharper, yes the colors are a bit more onto the warmer side - but besides this, way equal to the 35/2.8 Yashica ML, but i wouldn't ever spent up to 320 EUR just for the Zeiss 35/2.8, if i wouldn't own two copies already....and also especially won't pay that much ever for that old C/Y Zeiss lens...the usual price for the Distagon is around 230-250 EUR (MM Type) these days. Wink

For instance:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1012651/2

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mattiaswirf/sets/72157606583447631

It sounds like a quite bad joke for myself, especially here at mflenses somebody says the Yashica ML 35/2.8 is not a good lens..kinda weird.

Just for the record, the price for the 35/2.8 ML have had been raised up to 150 EUR and little more, depending onto the lens cindition,
and the lens is quite rare these days on ebay & others.

The ML Zoom 35-105 is optically mediocre compared to the 28-85.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 13, 2015 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Good enough to me, Samsung NX11 @F8 + post process


PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
barryreid wrote:
Hmmm. My experience of the yashica ML35, admittedly based on just one sample, Places it as the worst ML lens I've tried. Far worse than the 28ML, 21ML, 50/1.7, indeed I'd rather shoot the 35-105ML.

c'mon - the 35-105 ML can't even compete with the 28-85 ML, and is more the worst ML Zoom for my taste. Especially not equal to the 35/2.8 ML prime IQ. Perhaps you've got a really bad copy. Just watch flickr for instance for that 35/2.8 ML, it's way good.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2