Yashica ML 2.8/28mm: [8/7] vs [7/6] versions

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4015 Location: Switzerland

EDIT It seems I have been misled by some inaccurate information published on the Yashica forum
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1djGisgkd2s098X4ahGIjCZJ20ybTf0jCdJv9ZVFQj3w/edit?gid=0#gid=0

A more careful investigation of the reflections on the front part of the lens shows NO differences whatsoever!
This means that the two lenses shown below have the same [7/6] computation.
The two lens sections shown are correct however.

SORRY ABOUT THAT MISTAKE!! I will add further information later on.

S

As you may know, there are two "classical" versions of the Yashica ML 2.8/28mm (plus a late version made by Cosina). The two classical versions have different computations - the first one is a sophisticated [8/7] construction, the later a slightly simplified [7/6] computation. At least the first one, introduced with the very first ML series in 1975, was made in Yashicas Tomioka facility. Here are the two lens sections:

Here's an image of the two lenses side by side:

The only diferences are a slight difference in the size of the front lens (accompagnied by a slightly different metal rim around the front lens) and some differences concerning the reflexions on the glass, difficult to spot as well. Easiest way to differentiate are the serials:

1st version [8/7]: A120XXXX
2nd version [7/6]: A123XXXX, A124XXXX, A125XXXX, A126XXXX, A127XXXX

I hope this is useful for some hardcore collectors here Wink

S

visualopsins · Expire: 2025-04-11

Thanks stevemark. What are the MFD? Smile

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1266

I've been interested in this lens some time ago, as , some users were considering same level or better than distagon cy. Others were more realistic to admit the coatings on Zeiss help the micro contrast to be better on most of the cases. How would you compare the 2 versions you have? Is one of them so good that might be the reason some are praising it ? What about comparing it to distagon? Thanks

BrianSVP · Joined: 09 Jun 2023 Posts: 351 Location: Philadelphia

Having used both, honestly, the 28mm f/2.8 slot is IMO among the weaker spots in both the Zeiss and the Yashica lines in the C/Y mount. Having used basically all the common lenses and several of the exotics in both lines, My take is that typically, the ML lenses really do approach their Zeiss counterparts and in some cases (e.g. 35mm f/2.8 ) arguably exceed them. The AEJ/MMJ Zeiss lenses were manufactured for Zeiss by Yashica in the same factories as the ML lenses, so it stands to reason that they had the expertise to make similar-level lenses.

One thing I can say, though, is that typically the mechanical quality on the ML lenses is surprisingly better by a wide margin than that of the Japanese Zeiss lenses, which use a lot more plastic and chintzier designs than the ML lenses, which are among the best-built of their class/era, do.

It's pretty clear that Zeiss was merely building to the specs set by Zeiss, as the German-made counterparts are built similarly, but the C/Y line is among the least well-built of the lenses ever released by West German Zeiss, and I say that not having nearly as high an opinion of their mechanical engineering (or that of the German lens makers in general) as some seem to have. The more expensive/exotic lenses tend to be more robust, but lenses like the ubiquitous 50mm f/1.7 Planar are just bad mechanically, despite having being pretty fabulous optics.

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4015 Location: Switzerland

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4015 Location: Switzerland

BTW: Does anyone have the lens section of the Yashica DSB 2.8/28mm?

It certainly isn't the same as the Yashica ML 2.8/28mm [7/6] ... as proven by the clearly different shape of some reflections on its glass surfaces!

S

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1266

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4015 Location: Switzerland

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4015 Location: Switzerland

Obviously Yashica themselves got confused as well:

The above lens leaflet clearly states "7 elements in 6 groups", yet the lens section depicts the [8/7] version!
I hope you forgive me my previous error .,.

S

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1266

what about the auto yashinon ds-m? would that fit better? i´ve only read about the yashica dsb having same lens section as the older yashinon, but it wasn`t mentioned exactly wich version was it

I`m also surprised to read how well praised are these ds-m lenses, likely at the same level with the ML

koji · Expire: 2012-12-27

Here is an another info:

https://livedoor.blogimg.jp/ugen/imgs/2/5/25f202e9.jpg

You can get the bigger one by clicking.

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1266

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4015 Location: Switzerland

alex_d · Joined: 19 Jan 2019 Posts: 419

well I have;
- auto yashikor (yashinon auto 28 dx) - only one on m42
- dsb 28
- sun 28
- ml 28

if I can find some time and nice weather (=light) I could make some pics to 'compare' them ..
and of course if there is some interest.
on aps-c sensor so no corner porn available ..

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1266

I am curious how the DX is rendering, supposing that it has a different lens section than the DSB and ML version, but the Sun???? I had a Sun made very sturdy lens, but image quality wasn't up to first maker, but with these lenses one never know what to expect

alex_d · Joined: 19 Jan 2019 Posts: 419

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1266

it`s interesting the connection ds-m/dsb/ml yashica lenses , was there improvement only on coatings? so what was the origin of this 28mm? tomioka or zeiss design? dx is interesting for being different to all these i guess character lens

BrianSVP · Joined: 09 Jun 2023 Posts: 351 Location: Philadelphia

The DS-M and DS-B lenses adopted a new mechanical construction scheme that is identical forward of the mount and is very different from how the earlier DS and DX lenses were constructed.

In many (all?) cases, the equivalently specced lenses appear to have the same element geometries. ML lenses appear to be all-new compitations except for the ones outsourced to Tokona and Cosina.

I've seen claimed that DS-M means that the lens is milticoated, but as far as I can tell, this "fact" is simply something someone alleged in the early days of the web that's been repeated for decades with no independent corroboration. The much more parsimonious explanation is that "m" means "m42," and b means "bayonet," and the naming convention was adopted to differentiate the two when Yashica started making C/Y mount lenses. Other manufacturers adopted similar conventions (e.g, Ikarex BM and TM). The contention that DSB lenses are single coated similarly doesn't seem to be borne out by comparisons between DS-M and DSB lenses that have similar-lookingcoatings.

YUS lenses were only sold in the USA, hence the name ("Yashica U.S."). I don't know much about them, but supposedly some are identical to DSB lenses, while others are different.

55 · Expire: 2022-06-15

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

I have a copy of this lens which I bought new some years ago. Mine has the serial number correspinding to the 8/7 configuration of elements but has a linkage missing so can only be used in full manual mode. Also, although it has 'ML' on the front bezel it is not highlighted in white paint. Would anyone know why my lens would be like this?