Yashica ML 21mm 3.5, opinions and advice needed

[seta666]

Hello,
I have been thinking for a while of this lens, I really like yashicas ML, I think they are quite affordable and nice lenses, but when you go to the wider ones.
I recently bought the yashica ML 24mm and I think it is a beautifull lens and the most expensive one I bought to date at 155€ incluiding shipping from one of our members on ebay. The other yashicas have cost me between 35-60€ (28mm, 35mm, 50 1.7 & 50 1.4)
Yashica ML 21mm is very expensive though, from 350€ and farther up. Is it really worth it or has it some kind of collector premium on it?
Now my wider lenses are tokina RMC 17mm (very wide but so so optically) and the mir-20M ( I have not tried it yet properlly but so far I see it has great colours and very nice close focus capability, flare problems too but seem to be fixed with a little hand shielding)

If I wanted to buy the 21mm ML I would have to sell both lenses, worth it?
Regards

[Attila]

F16Sunshine and Koji have it and they have good opinion about this lens, so definitely good idea to sell your lenses and take it.

[F16SUNSHINE]

I would not hesitate if you have a chance to buy a nice one.
It's a rare lens as few will sell it.
Only the zuiko 2/21 and distagon 2.8/21 were better in my test.
The ML us excellent. If you can find the original hood it's even better.

Some shots from Koji
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/japenese/yashica/yashica_ml_21mm_f3_5/

[MF-addicted]

Yashica ML 21 recommended without any doubt.
Nearly no visible distorsion and CA. Good contrast. Sharp to the edge stopped down slightly.
A lens I will not let go.
17mm lenses you can get anytime.

Real Yashica gems are ML 15, 21, 24 and ML 100 macro


http://louislam.photopage.org/Yashica/Yashica.htm

[seta666]

I am seriously considering getting one; what would be a fair price for a lens in good shape?
But, after farther testing I like the mir-20M a lot, good color, sharp from 3.5 very little CAs and very close focusing
Well, I will have to decide
Regards

[alex]

I have the 21mm ML and won't part with it. Prices on this have gone up markedly, though not by as much as the Flektogon 20mm, which I also have (in the f/2.8 version). I rate the 21 ML higher than the Flek. In the couple of years since I bought the 21 ML, I've seen it fetch with ease twice what I paid. Very rare on the market now, though it was never common.

[jjphoto]

I can't fathom why the 21 ML is getting the prices that it is these days.

[alex]

[jjphoto]

[alex]

[hk300]

One of my friends in HK did a a quick test on his 5D together with a Flek 20/2.8 and i found the Yashica lens to produce sharper images than the Flek.

If I can find a Yashica at a reasonable price i will get one immediately!

[alex]

[seta666]

The truth is that I wonder if for a less than an amateur like my self is it worth to spend 300-400€ on a lens like this or rather buy one of the more actual wide zooms, like the Canon 17-40 f4 L (500€ second hand) or the tamron 17-35 2.8-4 (200-300€); I also red somewhere that the wide lenses optical formula has changed a lot more than standard lenses
Yesterday I tested the mir-20M and the yashica ML 24mm against the cosina 19-35.
The mir 20 was very sharp from 3.5 but suffers flare on the corner even with it not pointed to the sun (orio wrotte about this) and the cosina was not very good at the 19mm setting(specially on the widest settings); however at 24mm and sttopped down a bit was sharper than the 24 ML (I have to do the test again because I can not believe it), CAs and distortion were higger on the cosina.
The cosina 19-35 is a very cheap lens, I guess that a Canon 17-40 would do it better

Some other MLs I bought were really bargains like 28mm 35€, 50mm 1.4 60€ but this 21mm I wonder if I really need it or is just collector´s fever wish

I have to do farther test with what I own now and then make a decision

As an example I bought few weeks ago a tokina M42 RMC 17mm (some people regard it as a dog) for 69€ on ebay, look at this one with nikon mount which has not ended yet 150437365151
Regards

[MF-addicted]

My quality criteria towards lenses and especially wide-angel lenses is cornersharpness and CA.
Often CA and sharpness goes contrary.
For example my Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 28-85 is sharp as a knife @ 28mm and f=3.5, but has the most amount of CA, I have seen in this range.
The Yashica ML was not that sharp, but had nearly no CA. So this was more useful for image with leaves against bright sky.
The solution in the end was a Zeiss Distagon 28 with excellent corner sharpness, nearly no CA and flare.
CA for me is now a real quality factor.
The EF wideangels are said to have problems with corner sharpness and CA, even the L glass ones. Only new Nikkor wideangels and wideangel-zooms are said to be of high quality.

[rbelyell]

seta, your ? regarding what a 'less than amateur' should spend on a particular lens is i think very appropriate. as a 'less than amateur' myself, i personally find it not worth it to spend more than $!50-200usd on any lens, let alone a niche lens like a 20mm. i paid more for the zeiss planar T 50/1.4 because it was a lens i could use constantly, especially indoors at low light, so i thought it was worth it to me because of how much i would use it, though i still looked and waited until i found a model that sold for much less than the going rate.

so, if you feel like that also, my question to you would be why would you want to spend so much money on a niche lens when you already have a very good one in the mir 20m? tbh, i myself have been looking for a mir 20m but myself am unwilling to pay the almost $200usd it costs because it is a lens that i will not use so often! for my talent level and the amount of time i would use the lens compared to other FL's, i would not even consider a more expensive 20/21mm. only my opinion for me of course.

perhaps to be happy with a very good niche lens already in your bag, and spending the extra money on a more versatile lens you would use more often is a calculus worth making.

[seta666]

[rbelyell]

yeah, ive found the same thing. once you get going, buying these lenses feeds on itself, almost regardless of reason! truly, its only now, after almost a year that i am conciously slowing down to, as you say, enjoy what ive purchased, and also really reflect on what i like and what ive acquired that i can let go. i think a lens hood sounds like a good idea!

[F16SUNSHINE]

[bghomofaber]

Take a MIR 20 3.5. Grat lens, no distortion if kept upright, even lighting at the corners. I even bought an adaptor to use it on leica m.

Went to Munich around 1990 to buy a distagon 18, after saving two salaries .. shop owner told me he didn't want my money and made me buy the MIR.

Never regretted it.