Yashica 1.7 vs. Leica Summicron 50mm f/2

[sansen]

HI everyone!
I have been wondering if anyone has had the opportunity to compare the 1.7 45mm Yashica found on the GT/GTN/GSN etc. with the Leica Summicron 50mm f/2 ? ( The circa 1969-1970 production )

I would really like to hear some opinions on these two lenses and how they compare in real time shooting situations.

I have been happily shooting away with my new GT and have been very impressed and happy with the results, and the ease of use in many shooting situations. This is a fantastic camera for the cost !

I was very lucky in finding one that is in near mint condition except for a slight amount of haze on the inner viewfinder glass, with the most showing on the inside front glass. The glass in the back is almost totally clear but will get a cleaning anyway. I decided as mentioned in another post to go ahead and fit a new seal kit on the back and now that I have a few rolls under my belt, I'm ready to tackle the glass cleaning, which is really not that bad.

Now that I am ready to start a project of night time, available light, dusk and streetlight lit shots, I think it will help considerably to have these as clean as possible to aid in the focusing in that light situation.

I also wanted to thank many of you that have posted over the years with regard to this series of cameras, your wisdom and insight has saved me countless hours and has allowed me more fun time with the camera.
stew

 

[ErnestoJL]

IMHO, comparison of two lenses should be done under laboratory conditions in order to obtain results that can be compared. Figures for contrast, resolution, or aberrations wouldn´t tell you exactly how this particular lens behaves under real shooting conditions.
The subjective or personal appreciation of a lens performance is what it is, really personal. This means that you may like it or not, or prefer one lens or another.
One funny thing that happened to me at the time I had my first exhibition was this:
Two guys were seeing the pictures and at some time asked to know the photographer. I was introduced and they (one of them is a Leica collector) asked which cameras I used to take the pictures. The Leica fan smiled and said loudly: of course that one was taken with an old Elmar, and this other was taken with a ´Cron.
I smiled and explained that the first was with a Zorki 1 fitted with and Industar 22, and the other witjh an Electro 35.
If such experts can be fooled so easily, then the lens is as good as it should be. Enjoy the Electro 35. It´s a real gem.
Cheers
Ernesto

 

[Frontman]

Hmm, I have both, I should sacrifice a couple rolls of film in a shoot-out. I did a comparison recently between my 35/2.8 summaron and a Canon FD 35/2, and I still can't decide which lens is better, though the Summaron cost 7 times what I paid for the Canon lens.

 

[ErnestoJL]

If the difference in performance of two lenses of same focal distance and aperture but of different make can only be found through expensive laboratory testing, and a shooting test doesn´t show a visible difference (allways under same shooting conditions), it is under criitical magnification of the negative, and of course taken with a high resolution film like Ilford Pan F, then I will buy the cheaper one.
IMHO there is a subjective factor in it which goes far beyond what a technical report can tell. If someone wants e.g. a Leitz lens, it is OK, the Leitz made lens will be better than any other (being it Leitz made, the user will feel better with it than with any other lens). But if someone wants just a camera with a good lens, almost any brand can be.
Actually prices are distorted: some brands are overpriced and others severely undervalued. That´s why some lenses will cost seven times the others prices, or perhaps more than that.

Cheers

Ernesto

 

[Frontman]

One might think that there would be a more obvious difference between a $700 Summicron and a $25 Yashica Electro. If the differences can only be observed by critical observation in a laboratory-like setting, then there is little logic in spending more than $25 for a Summicron lens, or spending less than $700 for a Yashica Electro.

 

[Rogier]

I was checking my Yashica images in order to help me make a decision about purchasing a 50mm lens for my M8.
I can only hope that what ever I am getting will get the same results.

Check my flicker page to see some samples.

 

[LeicaFoReVer]

no comparison needed, yashica lens can be sharp but vignets like crazy wide open and distortion is visible at the corners...

 

[f16sunshine]

Each lens will lend it's personality to your photo. Which is better? You will decide. I like the Yashinon for it's flaws ( open its only center sharp and does not illuminate evenly to edges) and slightly wider perspective. The Summicron(s) are more consitent across the full frame and likely render higher lpm.

 

[ErnestoJL]

I´m not saying that Leitz lenses are bad, nor than any Yashinon is better than any other lens. Please do not think that that was mi intention.
What I think is that every person has it´s own taste and would be satisfied with any lens, be it Leitz, Zeiss or whatever, depending on what his or her expectations are. It also depends on what anyone is able to afford.
If a Leitz made lens is that expensive, there is a reason why and is the extensive QC as well as the cost of precisely machined parts nor to say the high cost of lens making.
Excellent, almost perfect parts are horribly expensive. One can decide if it´s worth or not.
Ernesto

 

[bronney]

sansen,

Why do you want to compare them? In photography, you don't compare one lens to another. You simply buy more. 😉

Buy different lens and cameras as you'd buy shoes, watches, and hats to go with your clothes. The "performance" of the lens is completely irrelevant if the chrome of your GSN doesn't match your belt. Or that nice enamel black paint GX doesn't match you vibrant feathery hat! In photography, one must have different cameras for different occasions. Why do you think the Japanese has snapshot, prosumer, entry level SLR, and god-forbid professional series? It's not market segmenting, it's simply so that you can buy one of each and bring those that matches your daily fashion. 😱

Don't get hung up on the performance of your lenses either. There's a myth that the best purchase, is always buying the best performing lens at the lowest price possible. But sometimes, you have to realize that the sexy chrome barrel of a rigid summicron really worths the price. Why? Because it goes well with a classic M, and a light brown camera strap of course! 😎

Summicron M 50 Rigid:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=10447341@N05&q=rigid&m=text

GSN:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=10447341@N05&q=gsn&m=text

 

[Dirk]

Before shelling out for the Summicron, compare shots on the web. E.g., Flickr, Pbase, etc. After looking at a few hundred examples, differences will become clearly visible, even at low Web resolution. At that point, you'll know if the differences are big enough for you to sway your decision one way or another. But that's only one part of the equation. The other part, often neglected in the discussion, is how the camera body works out for you. That'll be as important in the long run as the subtle differences in the way lenses draw. For example, in my opinion, the Leica Minilux has one of the best lenses availalble in 35mm film photogrpahy. Contrast, sharpness, color rendition are, in my opinion, superb. Yet I sold the Minilux because the handling and the viewfinder were atrocious (to me) and I almost never used it. Conversely, I used to love using the Ricoh 500G, which was much more involving and fun to use, even though the lens was just OK. The moral of the story is: You already know you love using the Yashica. Now try and see if the camera body you intend to use with the Summicron suits you. If the body doesn't "click" with you, the lens won't get much use.