HDSLR: Yashica 28 80 lens information request

[Takumarr]

Hi, I saw a old Yashica 28-80 MC lens (Y/C mount )on ebay for $28. I want to use it on
​​​​ Panasonic mft cams, Is this lens suitable for video?
It's about $150 for a similar Olympus lens, but if it's just a disappointing glass sculpture, I'd rather grab a headphone or tripod instead.
​​​​
If anyone has used it, I would appreciate any information.

 

[NorBro]

how bad could it be for $28?

it's going to be soft and slow but it might be good enough for you, especially on a good sensor

 

[Takumarr]

I want to achieve the same quality as midrange Olympias lense , it doesn't have to be great
I have another choice for this purpose, the Minolta 35-70, both lenses has a manual aperture.

 

[NorBro]

depends on which Olympus lens; some of the newer ones, even low-range, from the last 10 years have better designs and coatings that make the extra few bucks worth it compared to 20-30+ year old lenses

 

[Takumarr]

There are always a lot of cheap lenses for sale, I have to either buy it and try it out or find out about it first, both ways have their disadvantages...

 

[Imamacuser]

I haven't used that lens, but if it's from the 70s or 80s, it's probably not the sharpest. You can get a slightly slower D-series Nikon 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 for about the same price as the Yashica. A Tokina 28-80mm f/2.8 runs $100-$200, which could be paired with a focal reducer if you select the right mount.

 

[Peter C.]

Buying vintage lenses have been all the rage in photography. One of the more popular ones is the Helios because some versions create a unique bokeh. I personally stick to ones that people recommend and have m43 adapters. Be fore warned they can yield terrible image quality. But I understand the vintage look appeal. Have fun.

 

[Imamacuser]

Vintage primes tend to be sharp enough, but vintage zooms tend to be soft, so they're generally not a good option, unless you're always shooting outdoors and have the lens stopped down to f/8.

I have a Tokina 24-40mm f/2.8 from the 80s, and I have to stop it down to f/4.5 before it's usably sharp and contrasty, but it also has balsam separation haze between fused optical elements, so that's part of the problem.

 

[Takumarr]

Yes and my question is about old zooms not prime lenses, and I may have to go for a cheap zoom, I'm not interested in using a fix lens even though they have an amazing image. In fact, I am a fan of Sigma lenses, which produces zoom lenses at a cheap price equal to prime lenses.

 

[Takumarr]

I will have three options, to use the available zoom lenses

Yashika 28-80 MC
Rikenon 35-70 xr
​​​Nikon 28-70

​

There are negative points about Nikon 35-70 on the internet, but I don't know anything about it.
I also intersted that Rikenon -ricoh lenses for excellent quality

I also have a Sigma UC lens that I can't use on the Panasonic mft

​

 

[morgan_moore]

I haven't used that lens, but if it's from the 70s or 80s, it's probably not the sharpest. You can get a slightly slower D-series Nikon 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 for about the same price as the Yashica. A Tokina 28-80mm f/2.8 runs $100-$200, which could be paired with a focal reducer if you select the right mount.

D series nikkors zooms suck for video - all the mechanics is wrong - floppy.

The early manual nikkors are excellent for video..
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...sMF/2885mm.htm

--

Id go for a 35-70 unless you 'need' 28.

on fullframe (or s35+boost) 28-85 is excellent single lens solution

for more considered work a 18/20/24 + and 35-70 is better

I shot nearly all of 'nelson nutmeg' (my kids low budget feature) on a 35-70 and an 18/4 on a mk1 black tragic

The idea that the old lenses are soft is not that accurate IMO - certianly contax/canonFD/olympus and nikkor manual are excellent, mintola was alyway a budget brand like praktica.

The mintola is worth a try.. but a manual 35-70 fixed 3.5 of established brand will be far better.

 

[Takumarr]

Thanks for the replies
I did not understand 35-70 that you mean is this series

 

[morgan_moore]

Thanks for the replies
I did not understand 35-70 that you mean is this series

yes - in my opinion (as a nikkon owner for 20 years) these lenses are not good for manual film making.. and dont even work on the Z6-9 for 'auto' film making so really a very lost series.

 

[Takumarr]

In your opinion, which of the following lenses are better?

Rikenon 35-70
Cisina 35-70
Canon FD 35-70

 

[Takumarr]

about your experience with Nikon lenses, do you prefer a manual zoom lens?
The image I need , doesn't have to be very sharp

 

[morgan_moore]

Why do people talk about sharp lenses?

the mechanics matter.

old manual for manual shooting

modern af for af shooting

 

[cyvideo]

You won't get it for $30-50, but you will find one pretty cheap if you hunt around. Just check them for centering if after one. If knocked around, the centering can be affected. It's the one lens I still love from the early '90s. Dan Chung was a great fan of them some years back. It is the TOKINA AT-X PRO AF 28-70MM 2.6-2.8. It inherits its pedigree from Angenieux. They exhibit virtually zero breathing and are true parfocal. I have the Mk 1 version of the F/2.6-2.8, and I have an F/2.8 Mk II version. Over the last twenty years I have used them frequently on doco work and have never heard a bad word said about the results. They just aren't as "clinical" looking as the modern short zooms. I guess some people think of the look produced by them as "old cinema". I find on faces, especially older faces, they are a gentle lens with character. On S35 with a Speedbooster, they are a nice F/2.0. You be the judge. Plenty of 4K samples on these "Angie" Tokinas on everything up to Red 8K on YouTube. Detail links below. And a couple of video samples.

Chris Young

https://steemit.com/photography/@joh...8-70mm-2-6-2-8

http://www.photographyreview.com/pro...f-2-6-2-8.html

Some frame grabs off the Mk I

 

[morgan_moore]

i might be wrong but those tonka lenses are a bit plastic.

personallly a fd 35-70 or nikkor 35-70 (or contax or others) will better it for feel

Of couse the 'cost' of a 35-70 is that you will buy a wide too.

Samyang make a 16mm for s35 - or you need 20-24 for flull frame.

--

Of course the main thing we see is the value of nice lighting

 

[Imamacuser]

Were there any Nikon AI or AIS zooms that weren't single-touch focus & zoom?

Some of the D series zooms had separate focus & zooms rings, although I believe the sub-telephoto ones had short focus throw and the front element extending as you zoom.

The Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 is another great photo lens that's not good for video, as it has a very short focus throw, and it's an extending zoom lens, which makes it prone to sucking in dust.

Chris, I've read a lot of conflicting things about the Angenieux Tokinas. Some say the optical design has nothing to do with Angenieux, and that the optics are the same for the 28-70mm & the 28-80mm (not sure how that's possible with different focal lengths). The other negatives I've read is that it's not parfocal (but fairly close), soft till f/5.6, and has a short focus throw. There also seems to be a lot of variance between copies, which could partially be attributed to abuse and quality control, but a lot of people say to go for the 28-70MM 2.6-2.8 version, and I'm curious whether there's merit to the recommendation or if it's just hype.

P.S. How does one test for centering?

 

[cyvideo]

i might be wrong but those tonka lenses are a bit plastic.

If you are talking about the Tokina 28-70 physical lens... they would be the least plastic lens around. They are all metal construction and as heavy as all get out. All made from solid machined duralium. The Mk 1 weighs in 720 grams. Discontinued in 2004.

Chris Young

https://tokinalens.com/product/at_x_287_pro_sv/#specifications