Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>Last month I started a thread featuring the Fujica GS 645S, a match diode 120 rangefinder, which has all the makings of a classic film camera, but was made in the late 80's. This time I have a 35mm SLR that has match diode metering and manual focus from the early 90's: The Yashica FX-3 Super 2000. These were made from the late 80's through the early 90's with match diode metering. Now this is not by any means new technology as the Pentax MX had it in 1976 and I think on of the M42 mount Yashica SLR's had a similar arrangement (not sure if it was LED or just colored lamps). I chose to post this camera here because of its age. This is a very lightweight camera and was likely made for Yashica by Cosina. For lenses I used my Contax 50mm f1.7, Vivitar 100mm f3.5 macro, Vivitar 24mm f2.8 and Sigma 28-105 f4-5.6 zoom. I will post a photo of the camera and lenses when I can locate my USB cable to connect to the digital camera that I used to photograph the gear.<br> For the pictures taken with the camera I used Tri-X at box speed processed in HC110 dilution B and scanned with an Epson V600.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>Another one with the 24mm. This was an inexpensive lens, but a decent enough performer at middle apertures. While no match for my Tamron 24mm f2.5 or my Sigma 24mm f2.8, it is still very useful.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>Next we go to the Contax 50mm f1.7. The camera looks really "dressed up" with this lens attached.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>If you want to split hairs, the Contax 50mm f1.7 is slightly softer at wide open than many lower priced 50's (Minolta, Pentax, etc.) but really sparkles at the middle apertures. </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>The 100mm f3.5 Vivitar never got much respect for its build quality, but optically it is surprisingly good. In addition to focusing to 1:2, it makes a great compact tele for traveling and is excellent for portraits as well. </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>Above image is our town's microwave relay tower. All our long distance phone calls go through this tower. When I was in junior high school, this tower had only a single reflector which was aligned with the tower in the next town which further sent the signal. From a ranger tower 15 miles away I can see this tower and three others with my binoculars.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>Like the Vivitar, the Sigma 28-105 f4-5.6 has a lot of plastic in the barrel, but still has a metal lens mount. This lens was also available as an AF lens. When Sigma replaced it with a f3.8-5.6 version, they only made an AF version. This is another lens that was surprisingly good for the money. I got my used, mint- copy for around 60USD. It does seem to have a bit of barrel distortion at the 28mm setting.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>Here's the camera with the Sigma 28-105 f4-5.6 attached. </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 24, 2011 Author Share Posted April 24, 2011 <p>I also have the Contax 45mm f2.8 Tessar (pancake lens) and a Tokina 70-210 f4-5.6, but didn't get around to shooting some photos with those two lenses. I actually use the 45mm quite a bit because the camera will fit in a coat pocket with that lens attached.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_m3 Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 <p>I need one of these since they are completely mechanical - but then I have too many cameras already.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_kennedy9 Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 <p>Great photos. Well done.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_drawbridge Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 <p>A fine résumé of the camera and your lenses, <strong>Mike</strong>. The FX-3's continue to fetch good prices downunder<strong>, </strong>mainly because of the Contax connection, I suspect. All those lenses seem to perform well. Thanks for another informative post<strong>.<br /></strong></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 <p>One tip for any FX-3 Super 2000 users: if making time exposures remove the batteries. Otherwise the light from the VF LED's may fog the edge of the frame during exposures of several seconds or more.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 <p>I had somehow never seen this camera before. Nice work with an interesting assemblage of lenses.</p> <p>Some of the Yashica ML lenses are quite good too. (Although I envy you the Contax)</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 <p>Curiously enough, none of my lenses are actually Yashica. The Contax 50mm f1.7 came with a Contax 137 that my dad gave me when we closed our camera shop in 1993. The camera latter developed curtain bounce. I bought the Yashica body so I could have an inexpensive camera body to use the lens with. Then, over the years, I added the other lenses. I've been thinking about picking up a Yashica 135mm f2.8 ML at some point. The Yashica FX-3 Super 2000 is essentially the same camera underneath as the Ricoh KRII Super, the Olympus OM 2000, and IIRC, the Nikon FM10. All of them match diode with a top shutter speed of 1/2000 sec. Another nice thing about this Yashica is when you activate the self timer the mirror flips up then rather than right before the shutter is released so you get less mirror-induced vibration.<br> When we had our family camera shop we stocked some of the ML lenses including a rather nice 70-210 (or somewhere in that range). A real sleeper in the ML line was the 100mm f3.5 macro. Sold for a lot less than comparable macros from the Minolta, Canon, and Olympus SLR's we had in stock at the time. There was also a YUS line, but I don't remember too much about them.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yog_sothoth Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 <p>The Yashica FX-Super 2000 is a gem, as it is very small and light. If I were to make a list of "Must Have" cameras for Contax shooters I would put this on the list. It would be interesting to use the Yashica and a Contax S2 or S2b side by side. The S2 is likely better, but the Yashica has a lot going for it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brett_rogers Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 <blockquote> <p>This time I have a 35mm SLR that has match diode metering and manual focus from the early 90's: The Yashica FX-3 Super 2000. These were made from the late 80's through the early 90's with match diode metering. Now this is not by any means new technology as the Pentax MX had it in 1976 <em>and I think on of the M42 mount Yashica SLR's had a similar arrangement (not sure if it was LED or just colored lamps).</em></p> </blockquote> <p>Apropos the original post in this thread the Yashica TL Electro X featured an exposure system with two LED indicators in the viewfinder from circa 1969. Its predecessor the TL Electro may have had these too.</p> <p>Incidentally, TL Electro X and the older TL Super were amongst the very, very few M42 mount SLRs to have a proper mirror locking facility...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 26, 2011 Author Share Posted April 26, 2011 <p>Thanks, Brett. I wasn't sure if those were LED's in the TL Electro X. I think one of those models had U and inverted U shaped lights. If both lighted exposure was correct.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumpton Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 <p>Mine is still working well. Unfortunately I off loaded two nice lenses for it, the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 and the Yashica (Yashinon?) 21mm f3.5. If you ever get a chance to find the 21mm Yashica, and need such a wide angle lens, you cannot go wrong. It is one of the best 21mm lenses prior to the aspherical Leica lenses. A diamond in economy clothing. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_livacich Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 <p>The Yashica did <strong>NOT</strong> have LED's. They were tiny light bulbs. The first camera to use LED's was the Fujica ST801, circa 1972.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 29, 2011 Author Share Posted April 29, 2011 <p>Makes sense, Jeff. LED's were still fairly new technology having only been around since the early 60's and the early ones were too dim and expensive. My first device with LED's was a cassette recorder that I bought in 1974 which had a single LED record indictor. The following year I got an LED calculator. Still not real bright even then as I think Nixie tubes were still being used for the brighter digital readouts and possibly vacuum fluorescent as well. Both of those were too bulky and power hungry to ever find their way into a camera so when LED's got a little brighter and less expensive, they were a natural. I remember the ads for the Fujica ST 801 and I believe you are correct.<br> Thanks, all for the great responses. I decided to give the 45mm f2.8 Tessar some exercise so it's currently mounted on the FX-3 Super 2000. I will post when I can.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted April 30, 2011 Author Share Posted April 30, 2011 <p>Here's how the FX-3 Super 2000 looks with the C.Z. 45mm f2.8 Tessar. Fits nicely in a jacket pocket.<br> BTW, I wasn't the first to think of this combo. While we may never know who really thought of it, I remember reading Cora Wright Kennedy's column in Popular Photography (or was it Modern) when this lens first came out. She explained that instead of using it on her Contax SLR, that she preferred to take advantage of its light weight by using it on a lightweight SLR. If memory serves, the SLR was the Yashica FX-3 Super 2000. </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck_foreman1 Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Mike interesting array of lenses. Funny how they are so many "Contax" I have the FX-2 as my starter camera/learner/must have. My brother bout an FX3 2000 on my recommendation. So it's still around. He has a medium Yashica zoom 70-135?? Not sure. I too have often thought this is the perfect camera to have. Interesting to note the "other" Cosina stable mates. I should've recognized that.. never occured to me! I have the Zeiss 1.4 Planar and it is just a great lens. I have a 135mm Sigma in this mount. I've tried to keep a look out for the 21mm or the 24mm like you have but either I have no money when they're there, or seldom up. No real co-incidence I seldom have money! Excellent results. Not surprised you can see the microwave tower from far away.. these things work on line-of -sight too!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted May 1, 2011 Author Share Posted May 1, 2011 <p>And a couple from the 45mm f2.8 Tessar. I used Rolleipan 25 processed in HC110 dilution H and scanned with an Epson V600.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted May 1, 2011 Author Share Posted May 1, 2011 <p>Here's one at near to close focus. The 45mm Tessar does not focus as closely as the 50mm f1.7 Planar, but that's a small price to pay for compactness.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now