| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:20 am Post subject: Yashica ML50/2.0 |
 |
|
Laurence wrote:
Here is a test shot from the 50/2. This was a few weeks ago - man, how the weather changes
quickly! There is probably a foot of snow there now. 
Image is cropped from the bottom, as I felt there was too much expanse of water. I guess I
shouldn't even have worried about that, seeing as these are just tests of the lens.
This was scanned from a color negative of Kodak Gold. I don't usually have much luck
on scanning negatives, but this one came out acceptable enough.
The sharpness out of the camera was good; the scanner reduced the sharpness overall.
Only post-processing was the crop. The accuracy of the colors amazed me. However, there
are some magenta artifacts here and there. If I wanted to make this a truly good image, I would scan
it at high resolution and use post-processing to sharpen and color correction, and cut down the pixelation.
I have the Yashica ML 50/1.9 as well. It is much lighter than this lens, because of the plastic parts. I will
try to compare these two similar lenses. Like most 50s, they are quite sharp on a slide.
Yashica ML 50/2
Contax AX
Kodak Gold
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kryss
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Posts: 2169
Location: Canada
Expire: 2017-09-18
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kryss wrote:
Hi Laurence tried to improve it a little ,hope you don't mind.Have the following if interested.
ML 55mm f2.8 macro.
DSB 28mm f2.8.
ML 45-75mm f3.5/4.5 zoom.
ML 80-200mm f4.
Vivitar 2x-24 tele-converter.
Contax infrared transmitter& receiver. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrickh
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 8551
Location: Oregon
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
patrickh wrote:
Frankly Laurence I am amazed at the quality after so much processing. Film - scanner - PP is a long way around and so much can be lost at each stage. That 50/2 is much better than its price would suggest - like several other lenses with faster siblings, it tends to get lost in the headlong rush to "speed". I have recently been able to play with rokkor and hexanons, and I must say I generally prefer them to my Yashicas.
patrickh
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D300 Nikon D200 Nex 5N
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 300/4.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Arsat 50/1.4, Kiron 28/2, Vivitar 28/2.5, Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Vivitar 28/2.5, Tamron 28/2.5, Formula5 28/2.8, Mamiya 28/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Flektogon 35/2.4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Takumar 35/3.5, Curtagon 35/4, Takumar 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro, Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Takumar 50/2, Industar 50/3.5, Sears 55/1.4, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Takumar 105/2.8, Steinheil macro 105/4.5, Tamron 135/2.5, Jupiter 135/4, CZ 135/4, Steinheil Culminar 135/4,5, Jupiter 135/3.5, Takumar 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, CZ 135/2.8, Taika 135/3.5, Takumar 150/4, Jupiter 200/4, Takumar 200/4
Exakta: Topcon 100/2.8(M42), 35/2.8, 58/1.8, 135/2.8, 135/2.8 (M42), Kyoei Acall 135/3.5
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, Distagon 25/2.8
Hexanon: 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 52/1.8, 135/3.2, 135/3.5, 35-70/3.5, 200/3.5
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Biometar 80/2.8, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Minolta SR: 28/2.8, 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 45/2, 50/2, 58/1.4, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, 200/3.5
RF: Industar 53/2.8, Jupiter 8 50/2
Enlarg: Rodagon 50/5,6, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, Vario 44-52/4, 150/5.6 180/5.6 El Nikkor 50/2,8,63/2.8,75/4, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, 135/5.6 Schneider 60/5.6, 80/5.6, 80/4S,100/5.6S,105/5.6,135/5.6, 135/5.6S, 150/5.6S, Leica 95/4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
kryss, you did pretty good on the reconstruction! I would probably prefer something about halfway between
the saturation levels between our two image renditions. Thank you for taking a turn at the image - this is what
enables me to learn things and to see alternative views. Love it!
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
| patrickh wrote: |
Frankly Laurence I am amazed at the quality after so much processing. Film - scanner - PP is a long way around and so much can be lost at each stage. That 50/2 is much better than its price would suggest - like several other lenses with faster siblings, it tends to get lost in the headlong rush to "speed". I have recently been able to play with rokkor and hexanons, and I must say I generally prefer them to my Yashicas.
patrickh |
patrick, you are right - I usually lose a ton of 'good stuff' from all the processing and scanning of a negative.
I agree wholeheartedly on the quality of the 50/2. I have some Provia being developed that had several images
taken with the 50/2. I would almost bet the whole farm that the images are extremely sharp and contrasty. I wonder
why it doesn't gain much respect? Do you think just because it is not as 'fast' as other 50s? If so, that doesn't seem a valid
concept because we know that the speed of a lens doesn't even become an issue in landscape shooting. And even in
digital imaging with a 50/2 attached, could provide nice hand-held low light pix at higher ISOs, I think.
I am hearing good things about Rokkors here and there. It seems that is another 'forgotten' lens brand.
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Hello Larry...IMO the 50mm f2 from any make was considered to be the poor man's lens and inferior when the flagship was f1.6, f1.7 or f1.8 etc. For some makes this was true but others not so. IIRC the Pentax 55mm f2 was the same as the f1.8, and Pentax put a ring or whatever to stop it opening to f1.8.
Also I think Minoltas are not forgotten as I too want their lenses but they are more scarce and expensive, so I have three Minolta cameras and only three Minolta lenses and two of those are nifty fifty's 
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sonyrokkor
Joined: 24 Sep 2012
Posts: 222
Location: Perù, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
sonyrokkor wrote:
Minolta (rokkor) lenses are really good, as almost all know.
I have now MC 28/3,5, 45/2, MC 50/1,7, MC PG 50/1,4, MC 100/2,5, MD 135/2,8 and MD 300/4,5 IF.
All good, but the PG and the MD 135 are very good ones.
In the segment of 2/50 lenses, not all of them are forgotten. The old nikkor, summicrons M and R, MD rokkor, planar, among others, are recognized lenses. Yet the yashica ML is known as a good one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 3666
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
It gets no respect because it really is a cheaply made lens, that happens to have nice glass in it.
I have to get another copy because mine is infested and there is no way to open it up to clean.
_________________
A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
| Laurence wrote: |
I am hearing good things about Rokkors here and there. It seems that is another 'forgotten' lens brand. |
They were forgotten.
Since the NEX came out they have been resurrected. 
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
Excalibur: Thank you for the great info!
sonyrokkor: are the PG and MD designations meant to show a higher quality lens within the Rokkor lineup?
Lightshow: I am surprised about being cheaply made. It seems so robust to me, and seems to be of all metal construction. The 1.9 is a whole lot lighter and seems flimsy to me, and of course is mostly plastic. You could certainly be correct though, I'm just giving a layman's opinion based on looking at the exterior of the lens. That said, the anti-glare coating on the lens looks like it was smoothly applied, and shows differing colors within the lens groups.
LucisPictor: I see. The Nex series has really brought up the desire for older lenses even more than ever.
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Posts: 941
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
I'll chip in what little I know. The minolta MD series came out after the MC series.
I dont know whats different from MC>MD, possibly the coatings or couplings.
I think the PG is some sort of nomenclature for the number of elements in the lens
but Im not sure about that. One thing I know for sure, is that Minolta manual focus
lenses dont fit their AF bodies.
_________________
===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
| hifisapi wrote: |
I'll chip in what little I know. The minolta MD series came out after the MC series.
I dont know whats different from MC>MD, possibly the coatings or couplings.
I think the PG is some sort of nomenclature for the number of elements in the lens
but Im not sure about that. One thing I know for sure, is that Minolta manual focus
lenses dont fit their AF bodies. |
Well, that's a shame that they won't fit. Thanks for the information you were able to provide. 
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 3666
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
Marking the lens with the number of elements/groups was used by some manufactures prior to multicoating,
and letters was a simple method to display that information.
See here for more info:
http://minolta.rokkor.de/lensdesignations.htm
This link is also useful for seeing the differences.
http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/index.html
I personally love the design of the 2nd gen MC's(MCII) more than any other lens.
My comment about the lens being cheap is aimed at the cost cutting measures used in making the mechanical lens body, not the optical glass or the coatings used, gluing the elements in can be more accurate, but servicing is a "Female dog".
_________________
A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
