View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Jesito
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 5745 Location: Olivella, Catalonia, (Spain)
Expire: 2015-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:29 am Post subject: Yashica duel - Electro 35 vs Yashica Lynx |
|
|
Jesito wrote:
Even feeling more comfortable with the Lynx, I suspect the better lens of the Electro 35 should be a matter of consideration.
Here you have a 100% crop of two shots, one with the Electro 35 and the other with the Lynx, both of the same subject but with slightly different view angle.
To be fair, the first was shot with an unbranded cheap film and the second one with Fuji Superia 200. Both processed by different labs, so the scans may be quite different as well.
First one is the Lynx.
It seems to me that the Electro wins, although I should do some further testing with the Lynx in better conditions.
Jes. _________________ Jesito, Moderator
Jesito's backsack:
Zooms Sigma 70-300, Tamron 35-135 and 70-210 short, 70-210 long, 28-70 CF Macro, 35-70, 35-80, Vivitar 70-210 KA, Tamron 70-250.
Fixed Industar-50, , Tamron 24mm, Tamron 135mm, Sands Hunter 135mm, Pancolar 50mm, Volna-3, many Exakta lenses
DSLR SIGMA SD9 & SD14, EOS 5D, Sony A700 and NEXF3, Oly E-330, E-400, E-450, E-1
TLR/6x6/645 YashicaMat, Petri 6x45, Nettar, Franka Solida, Brilliant
SLR Minolta X300, Fuji STX II, Praktica VLC3, Pentax P30t, EXA500, EXA 1A, Spotmatic(2), Chinon CM-4S, Ricoh, Contax, Konica TC-X , Minolta 5000, 7000i, 3Sxi, EOS 500 and CX
Rangefinders Chinon 35EE, Konica C35 auto, Canonet 28, Yashica Lynx, FED-2, Yashica electro 35, Argus C3 & C4, Regula Cita III, Voigtlander Vitoret (many), Welta Welti-I, Kodak Signette 35, Zorki-4, Bessa-R & L, Minolta Weathermatic, olympus XA2
Compact Film Konica C35V, Voigtlander Vitorets, Canon Prima Super 105, Olympus XA2 and XA3
Compact Digital Olympus C-5050, Aiptek Slim 3000, Canon Powershot A540, Nikon 5200, SIGMA DP1s, Polaroid X530, IXUS55, Kodak 6490, Powershot G9 and G10
CSCCanon EOS-M, Samsung NX100 and NX210, Lumix G5, NEX-F3
Last edited by Jesito on Wed Aug 13, 2008 6:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
if you compare two lenses based on different films, you risk to evaluate the films and not the lenses.
I suggest retesting with the same film and conditions (although of course I know it's expensive to do this with film and different cameras). _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE
Joined: 20 Aug 2007 Posts: 5486 Location: Left Coast
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE wrote:
Hi Jes
Orio is probably correct about film. That being said. You will in fact find better results in regard to contrast and color with the Electro. Yashica made improvements to the coatings over the years(as all companies did especially in that time). I like to use the lynx with B+W film. Especially pushing it 2 or three stops for that gritty grainy look. Only one of my Lynx RF's has a working meter. So sunny f16 is the norm when I shoot it. When estimating by eye pushing film a few stops gets You some more latitude. It also allows freedom to create and shoot in really low light. Not great for landscapes and architecture but, great for street shooting and candid portraits. I know you have only a small flat. But I would strongly suggest you develelop your own B+W film. The number of items needed for negative development fits in a rubbermaid the size of a small picnick cooler. It really is more fun than going to the lab. Also the feeling of bringing those negs to life is really great. Printing of course takes more space and commitment of cash. If you have access to a nice scanner you are good to go. The scanner is my next purchase. I am waiting for Larry's report on the Epson V700. It is maybe more than I need but. If it lasts me more years It is of course worth it. I developed (B+W) two from last weekend last night. The negs look promising. Michelle and I might set up the enlargers and make contact proofs tonight. Keep them coming. Best wishes Andy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jesito
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 5745 Location: Olivella, Catalonia, (Spain)
Expire: 2015-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jesito wrote:
Orio wrote: |
if you compare two lenses based on different films, you risk to evaluate the films and not the lenses.
I suggest retesting with the same film and conditions (although of course I know it's expensive to do this with film and different cameras). |
You're right, Orio. But I started using cheap film (2€/roll) until I found an offer for Sensia 200 at the same price. Since then I use only Sensia for all the testing. The Lynx was tested before...
Also I know I should bring both cameras at once and to shot in the same light conditions. (What I've been doing in other occasions was to place the tripod and to shot in the same place, same light, same film. Not in this case).
I was trying to draw a rough conclusion about if the better lens of the Electro 35 justifies to use its automatic light metering, of if the difference was not so big to keep using the more handy Lynx with it's fully manual modes...
Jes. _________________ Jesito, Moderator
Jesito's backsack:
Zooms Sigma 70-300, Tamron 35-135 and 70-210 short, 70-210 long, 28-70 CF Macro, 35-70, 35-80, Vivitar 70-210 KA, Tamron 70-250.
Fixed Industar-50, , Tamron 24mm, Tamron 135mm, Sands Hunter 135mm, Pancolar 50mm, Volna-3, many Exakta lenses
DSLR SIGMA SD9 & SD14, EOS 5D, Sony A700 and NEXF3, Oly E-330, E-400, E-450, E-1
TLR/6x6/645 YashicaMat, Petri 6x45, Nettar, Franka Solida, Brilliant
SLR Minolta X300, Fuji STX II, Praktica VLC3, Pentax P30t, EXA500, EXA 1A, Spotmatic(2), Chinon CM-4S, Ricoh, Contax, Konica TC-X , Minolta 5000, 7000i, 3Sxi, EOS 500 and CX
Rangefinders Chinon 35EE, Konica C35 auto, Canonet 28, Yashica Lynx, FED-2, Yashica electro 35, Argus C3 & C4, Regula Cita III, Voigtlander Vitoret (many), Welta Welti-I, Kodak Signette 35, Zorki-4, Bessa-R & L, Minolta Weathermatic, olympus XA2
Compact Film Konica C35V, Voigtlander Vitorets, Canon Prima Super 105, Olympus XA2 and XA3
Compact Digital Olympus C-5050, Aiptek Slim 3000, Canon Powershot A540, Nikon 5200, SIGMA DP1s, Polaroid X530, IXUS55, Kodak 6490, Powershot G9 and G10
CSCCanon EOS-M, Samsung NX100 and NX210, Lumix G5, NEX-F3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jesito
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 5745 Location: Olivella, Catalonia, (Spain)
Expire: 2015-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jesito wrote:
F16SUNSHINE wrote: |
Hi Jes
Orio is probably correct about film. That being said. You will in fact find better results in regard to contrast and color with the Electro. Yashica made improvements to the coatings over the years(as all companies did especially in that time). I like to use the lynx with B+W film. Especially pushing it 2 or three stops for that gritty grainy look. Only one of my Lynx RF's has a working meter. So sunny f16 is the norm when I shoot it. When estimating by eye pushing film a few stops gets You some more latitude. It also allows freedom to create and shoot in really low light. Not great for landscapes and architecture but, great for street shooting and candid portraits. I know you have only a small flat. But I would strongly suggest you develelop your own B+W film. The number of items needed for negative development fits in a rubbermaid the size of a small picnick cooler. It really is more fun than going to the lab. Also the feeling of bringing those negs to life is really great. Printing of course takes more space and commitment of cash. If you have access to a nice scanner you are good to go. The scanner is my next purchase. I am waiting for Larry's report on the Epson V700. It is maybe more than I need but. If it lasts me more years It is of course worth it. I developed (B+W) two from last weekend last night. The negs look promising. Michelle and I might set up the enlargers and make contact proofs tonight. Keep them coming. Best wishes Andy |
Hi Andy,
Thanks for such nice considerations.
Trying B&W again after so many years is an issue in progress. No problem on developping at home, I keep the Patterson tank and I got some experience on developping. But I want first test all the cameras and lenses I got so far, and the queue is quite big. At a self imposed pace of one roll per week it will take some months until I reach the end of the queue and I could start trying B&W. For the case things would change, I got three rolls of B&W already: one 36x T400 Max, one Ilford HP4 and one Ilford HP5.
Since my (your ) first Lynx had a broken sprocket, I got a second one, (the one with the stuck shutter). I'll be taking parts of the broken one to improve the working one. I think I'll be finally keeping it for B&W if the experience is okay...
Scanning is another issue. My current HP is too slow and quite limitted.
I look forward to see Larry's experiences with the EPSON. Probably I should replace mine, now scanning negatives is a looooooong and boring task, to get not very good results. (That's why I currently rely on the lab).
Jes. _________________ Jesito, Moderator
Jesito's backsack:
Zooms Sigma 70-300, Tamron 35-135 and 70-210 short, 70-210 long, 28-70 CF Macro, 35-70, 35-80, Vivitar 70-210 KA, Tamron 70-250.
Fixed Industar-50, , Tamron 24mm, Tamron 135mm, Sands Hunter 135mm, Pancolar 50mm, Volna-3, many Exakta lenses
DSLR SIGMA SD9 & SD14, EOS 5D, Sony A700 and NEXF3, Oly E-330, E-400, E-450, E-1
TLR/6x6/645 YashicaMat, Petri 6x45, Nettar, Franka Solida, Brilliant
SLR Minolta X300, Fuji STX II, Praktica VLC3, Pentax P30t, EXA500, EXA 1A, Spotmatic(2), Chinon CM-4S, Ricoh, Contax, Konica TC-X , Minolta 5000, 7000i, 3Sxi, EOS 500 and CX
Rangefinders Chinon 35EE, Konica C35 auto, Canonet 28, Yashica Lynx, FED-2, Yashica electro 35, Argus C3 & C4, Regula Cita III, Voigtlander Vitoret (many), Welta Welti-I, Kodak Signette 35, Zorki-4, Bessa-R & L, Minolta Weathermatic, olympus XA2
Compact Film Konica C35V, Voigtlander Vitorets, Canon Prima Super 105, Olympus XA2 and XA3
Compact Digital Olympus C-5050, Aiptek Slim 3000, Canon Powershot A540, Nikon 5200, SIGMA DP1s, Polaroid X530, IXUS55, Kodak 6490, Powershot G9 and G10
CSCCanon EOS-M, Samsung NX100 and NX210, Lumix G5, NEX-F3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
montecarlo
Joined: 04 Apr 2007 Posts: 1865 Location: Romania
|
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
montecarlo wrote:
Hello,
As Orio and Andy said the film should be the same to compare the lens. The better quality the film is the better you'll see the difference if it is one.
http://web.archive.org/web/20041204042246/creekin.net/films.htm
Here I found this:
http://web.archive.org/web/20041210091955/medfmt.8k.com/mf/lenslpm.html
where it says:
" lens film system film system film system
lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm
100 : 100 50 80 44 50 33
200 : 100 67 80 57 50 40
300 : 100 75 80 63 50 43
400 : 100 80 80 67 50 44
500 : 100 83 80 69 50 45
600 : 100 86 80 71 50 46
Let us say you buy a pricey superior lens that delivers 600 lpmm aerial resolution (vs. 300 lpmm cheapie). With film resolution of 100 lpmm, the resulting system resolution should be 86 lpmm. This resolution modestly beats the cheapy lens, whose system resolution will be circa 75 lpmm.
What if you switch to typical color print film providing only 50 lpmm film resolution (third section of table above)? Now your pricey lens is only able to deliver 46 lpmm on the film, while the cheapy lens is uncomfortably close at 43 lpmm! A 3 lpmm resolution improvement is going to be awfully hard to see on most minilab prints, even at 8x10". That is why it doesn't matter much which lenses you use with low resolution limit color print films.
The big surprise on the above chart is how major improvements in lens quality and performance does NOT result in equally major improvements in the on-film overall system results. The film is the limiting factor here, not the lenses. Doubling the lens performance with 100 lpmm film resolution limits only resulted in a 15% overall system improvement. Using 50 lpmm film limits, the corresponding system improvement is only about 6%." _________________ Canonet QL17 III
Zenit E , Helios-44 58mm f:2.0 , Tair-11A 135mm f:2.8, Jupiter-9 85mm f:2.0,
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm f:2.4
Pentax MX, ME Super, Chinon CE4/CM4, Petri MC 28mm f:2, smc Pentax-M 50mm f:1.7, Soligor T 135mm f:2.8
Minolta X500, Tokina 28/2.8, Rokkor 50/1.7, 80-205/4.5
Nikon D90, Nikkor 35/2.0, Nikkor 50/1.8, Sigma 24/2.8, Nikkor 18-105 VR |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|