Tryout from a Yashica B with Yashikor Lens

Discussion in 'Classic Manual Cameras' started by uncle goose, Jun 28, 2007.

  1. Put a roll of film through this baby just to see if it's true what they say
    about the poor quality of the Yashikor Lenses. Seems completly bullsh*t to me,
    the results look great for suchs and old beast.

    <img src="http://users.skynet.be/unclegoose/brol/yashica1.jpg">
    <img src="http://users.skynet.be/unclegoose/brol/yashica2.jpg">

    Might seem a little fussy but I took them by hand and not on a Tripod on
    relativly low shutterspeeds (1/25 and 1/50th).
    Enjoy.
     
  2. I may have shakier hands than you but I thimk the results would be even better at 1/300 sec.
     
  3. I may have shakier hands than you but I think the results would be even better at 1/300 sec.
     
  4. I think that business about the Yashikors not being good lenses is a bunch of internet hype. I have used Yashikors, Yashinons and Lumaxars, and while the Yashikors are not quite as sharp, they are no slouches either.

    Nice shots.
     
  5. Yashikors are 3 element lenses that arent bad at all....but the Yashinons have a better Tessar-type 4 element lens. Same with Ricoh TLR's...the 3 element lenses are fine, but the 4 element Rikenon's are better.... I love this Ricoh TLR site
     
  6. You have to make larger prints to see quality differences between medium format lenses. I have three TLR cameras which take 120 film. They are the Yashica A, the Yashica 635 and the Minolta Autocord (late model, no meter). The Yashica A is the smallest and lightest of the three. If you close down a few stops you can get a very respectable 8X10 with this camera. The 635 is sharper when wide open and the Autocord is the sharpest of the three at or near maximum aperture. How will the corners look if I use the A wide open? Not as sharp as they could be. I a 5X5 print they still look nice.

    I had a Yashica Mat 124G in High School and college. It had an extremely sharp lens. The lens might have been better than than the Rokkor in my Autocord. The problem is that the 124G has many plastic parts and mechanically is not very robust. I finally go tired of fixing it and that's when I got the Autocord. I have been shooting with Bronica SLR cameras (6X45, 6X6 and 6X7) but I miss the lighter feel of the TLRs so I have been using an SQ-A with a waist level finder, a crank and the 50/3.5 PS. When you attach a prism finder and a Speed Grip you have something a lot heavier.
     
  7. I've never had a problem with a Yashikor lens. This was taken with a Yashica A:
    00LgPZ-37200184.jpg
     
  8. The Yashinon is a far better lens than the Yashikor. Just because you took a few so-so shots with a Yashikor means little. A Yashinon will give sharper results over a greater range of apertures and toward the edge of the frame as well as the center. These improved qualities will become more noticeable the more you enlarge the negative. You might get as good results with a Yashikor at certain apertures and if you don't enlarge too much. That said, a Yashikor on a tripod will probably take sharper shots than a hand-held Yashinon at slower shutter speeds.
     
  9. There are so many factors which affect lens sharpness besides the glass itself. The time of day, direction of light, humidity, type of film, shutter speeds if handheld, lens coatings.....
    Most TLR Yashicas were considered quality cameras and could take good shots. It's a lot like the Rolleicord line. Some people really dog the 3 element Zeiss Triotar, but I love its unique "bloom". It's likely that if there is something indefinably wrong with your photographs it's not the lens, but who is behind it.
     
  10. Forget the lens, those are lovely shots! :)

    I'd say the other lens is sharper, but sharper is not always better, for dreamy landscape such as these shots, it'll be ruined by a lens too sharp, the same thing applies for portraits.

    Crappy lenses has its uses, it's up to the photog to select the tool.
     
  11. "Just because you took a few so-so shots with a Yashikor means little."

    I'm not too sure what this comment is supposed to mean. I agree that a Tessar like Yashinon lens will perform very nicely and I have these on two cameras I use. I also use the Yashikor lenses on a Yashica 635 and the Yashica-A with excellent results consistently. I've been doing this since the mid-1950s.

    One of the issues I have serious disagreements about are with people who seem to think that "sharpness" (a very subjective term) is the end-all for evaluating lens quality. I beg to differ.

    I also don't take "so-so shots."
     
  12. Well, David M, if you find these shots "so-so" than let us have a look at your work. It's easy to comments on others while not showing things yourself.

    And indeed, maybe the sharpness is not to todays standards but you must keep in mind that these lenses where made some 50 years ago, technology has changed (although not always on the positive side). I just like the old look of lenses, not the clean sharpness of todays stuff.
     
  13. I have a Yashica 635 with the Yashikor lens, and I've no complaints at all. Possibly it's a little fuzzy when wide open, but this isn't an issue in 80% of cases (and this is also true of many other lenses/cameras which are routinely raved about here and elsewhere).

    Also, I don't think these shots are "so-so" at all - they're very nice indeed. I agree with the poster who said (I paraphrase) that sharpness can be overrated. Blur, bokeh, mistiness - call it what you will, it's a key part of hundreds of classic, timeless photographs. I went to a Cartier-Bresson exhibition a year or so ago and one of the things that struck me was how un-sharp, by modern standards, many of his most famous and beautiful images were.
     
  14. Uncle Goose,

    Lovely shots.. I have both and find both quite sharp. Conditions
    such as hand-held, aperture, landscape-portrait etc all play a role.
    Also sharp is relative and may just be because of the larger negative
    over 35mm. I have the "D" with the Yashikor) at some point the shutter got sticky and after the guy said replace the shutter.. bad idea.. it was never collimitated and the focus is off. I also had a Yashicamat 124 with the Yashinn but it flares easier it doesn't delivers noticeably sharper results, My tendence now is considering to sell the Yashicamat and repair the "D". But as mentioned here, it is rarely the camera or the lens, but who's standing behind it that makes the photo!!
     
  15. gib

    gib

    I have a Yashica D with the Yashikor, I like the results with that camera. Your shots look fine. As always, your best bet is to suit yourself. With any of these old cameras, if you want to check out the lens, put it on your tripod.
     
  16. I use a Yashica A with a Yashimar lens. I don't care what anyone says, I love the glass on this. The shutter speeds are of a basic use range, and they get the job done. A self timer would have been a nice touch, but hey, the price was right.
     
  17. Hi recently i was diging into my house warehouse at my home and i found the old photo gear
    from my dad it compend: 2 yashica electra 35 cameras and 2 lensess one is a telefoto and the other one is a wide angle and some filters too so, I remove one of the cristals filterto use the filter ring as a spacer and try to mount it in to my 18-70 lens from my sony alpha 350 and gess what? THEY fit¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ awesome
    so i went out to the streets to make some tests shots and the results where AMAZING very sharp images very good quality, not compared with the new age lensess but they can compete against better cameras than mine and canon lens and nikor lensess to, The selective focus tequniche using this lensess give to me awesome results take a look at my web and see for your selfs. www.vimototv.com see ya
     
  18. This is a sample of my lensess in to my sony A350
    00WoBJ-257333584.jpg
     

Share This Page