Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,854   Posts: 1,582,921   Online: 992
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    105

    Yashica ML 200 f4

    Hi Guys!Could you give informations and opinions about this lens?...Is it similar,better or almost better than the beautiful Canon FD 200 F4?Thank you very much!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    105
    Hi guys!...0 Answers?why?

  3. #3
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area (Albany, California)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,250
    Images
    1
    Sort of an uncommon line, old. That said I shoot the Contax/Yashica line and though I have not used that particular lens many of the Yashicas lenses are not bad at all. Especially 1 or 2 stops from fully open. Just do not pay much.
    Last edited by Richard Sintchak (rich815); 05-10-2013 at 10:24 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  4. #4
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,382
    I read the thread and I have a bunch of Yashica ML lenses, but no Telephoto lenses so I cannot comment.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Karlsruhe, Germany
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    19
    peters8,

    Here's a user's review in German if that helps you any:

    http://www.digicamclub.de/showthread.php?t=11661

    I don't have this ML lens myself, but conventional wisdom has it that, apart from the far-famed ML 500 mirror tele, the best MLs are on the short side, that is, from the superb macro lenses down to the ultra-wides and most anything in between. I once had an ML 2.8/135mm and swapped it for a Tokina prime with identical specifications, and it proved to be much sharper than the Yashi. If I were you I'd also consider getting an RMC Tokina 80-200 f4.0 manual zoom lens.

    later

    Michael

  6. #6
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    This is a pretty simple lens and it's likely good - I wouldn't expect it to be markedly better or worse than any other Japanese name-brand 200/4 of its era. It will very likely be better than zooms (excepting professional zooms) at 200mm though.
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  7. #7
    jjphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    147
    I've owned the ML 200/4 (not sure if it was the C version or normal) but I've never used the FD 200 so I can't compare them. I didn't like the ML 200 as it simply wasn't very sharp, wide open, and was OK stopped down but so are all lenses. I certainly wouldn't consider it a worthwhile lens and I wouldn't ever recommend one. Maybe I had a mediocre one but TBH I found most ML lenses (of the several I've owned over the years) to be average, with the odd exception.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    105
    Thank you for your support.
    for JJphotoo you remember the positive exception from the Yashica ML serie ?
    Thank you very much

  9. #9
    jjphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by peters8 View Post
    Thank you for your support.
    for JJphotoo you remember the positive exception from the Yashica ML serie ?
    Thank you very much
    No problem.

    At present I have the ML 50/1.4, ML 50/2, ML 55/2.8 Macro, ML 24/2.8. I use them on a Canon 5D2, don't tell anyone... I've had the ML 21/3.5, ML 200/4 which I used to use on transparency film and B+W.

    The 50/2 is rubbish. Just rubbish. It makes a decent body cap.

    The 50/1.4 is OK in that it renders very much like the Contax 50/1.4 but the ML is less sharp at every aperture and it suffers significantly from purple fringing/CA wide open (on digital, it might not be a problem on film). You can get much better 50/1.4's for the same or less money but why not just save a bit for the Contax and have one of the best 50/1.4's even compared to modern lenses.

    ML 50/1.4 at F1.4





    The ML 55/2.8 is in my bag most of the time and I use it quite a bit. There are no purple fringing or significant CA issues with it. It's a very good lens, I would certainly recommend it, but I suspect that macros are just an easy lens to design/build and I don't think I've ever heard of a bad macro lens. I suspect it's not in the same league as 'better' macros from Contax but it's also a very cheap lens.

    ML 55/2.8 all at F2.8














    The ML 24 is quite good and I have no real complaints about it. I just don't use it enough to comment much more, but I would certainly recommend it at the right price. I must like it because I sold one a very long time ago and then bought another one back again, but I just don't use that focal length much these days.

    The ML 21/3.5 has a reputation for being a fine lens. Mine was not very good wide open (and I'll bet they are all the same) and needed to be stopped down at last one stop and preferably 2 at which point it was extremely sharp. I would certainly recommend it but not at current prices.

    Having said/written all that, don't buy any of it (except maybe the ML 55/2.8). Save your money and buy the equivalent Contax lens if you can. The Contax coatings are superb and contribute significantly to improving contrast and controlling flare in general. They work perfectly on Yashica bodies so there's no excuse to NOT use them except for their cost. Good luck.

    JJ

    PS, don't tell anyone I'm shooting digital!

  10. #10
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    My ML 50/2 and DSB 50/1.9 lenses were terrific so I'm guessing the 50/2 that you describe has taken a fall or something.
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin