Yashica 124g - Is It Just Me......?

A

ARCHIVIST

Well-known
Local time
10:40 PM
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Messages
446
Location
BLUE MOUNTAINS, AUSTRALIA
View My Gallery
I have been a TLR user for 37 years. My first TLR being a Yashica 635. I still use two of these regularly.

I collected the Yashica TLRs some years back and at one point had 65 of them.

Recently I used a 124G for the first time in about five years and it felt very light and almost, dare I say, fragile compared with my older 635s. I used a 124G for a trip around Bali back in 1982 and the Yashinon lens gave fabulous results along with the built in meter which was very accurate but I cannot recall the camera having a fragile feel.

I felt as though it would not last the distance like my older 635 TLRs had done. I do realise that the older cameras had less plastic and alloy in their construction hence giving them more weight and a solid feel.

Anyone else feel this way?

Regards
Peter
 
Are you talking about 2 different 124G's? I believe the 124G's made near the end of production incorporated a lot more plastic than the earlier models... could be the second one you used was one of those. I do find my 124G to be lighter and doesn't feel as tank like as my Rolleicord Vb... but it's by no means flimsy.
 
The the later 124Gs are flimsy, and feel flimsy inside and out.
A Rollei or Mamiya is the way to go for a solid feeling TLR.
But one cannot deny the fact that the 124G is an excellent picture taker.
 
I had a 124 and a 124G (never used the latter as I never CLA'd it, and sold it ) and the G felt really flimsier than the "straight" 124. More plastic in the G, I really preferred the older one.
 
"QUOTE I believe the 124G's made near the end of production incorporated a lot more plastic than the earlier models... QUOTE"

Yes, it was a latter production model. This must be why it feels so delicate.

I was not aware the production materials differed in the last of the marque.

Peter
 
I bought a near mint 124G a year or so back. Learned then that the later models were not as robust as earlier ones (I also had a 635 many years before) and that the only difference between the "G" and the preceding model was gold-plated electrical contacts - whoopee-doo!
I thought the lens was only average and it proved to be so when I compared it with my Rolleiflex. That, plus the dim viewing screen (my Rolleiflex has a Maxwell Hi-Lux screen) convinced me to sell the Yashicamat. Looked nice but wasn't quite up to expectation.
 
65 Yashica TLRs

65 Yashica TLRs

Thats an awful lot of Yashica Cameras and the only cure for GAS attack like this is either to book yourself into rehab or get my old Yashica W.sale price list and documents .

Gordon S.
 
Leigh Youdale said:
I thought the lens was only average and it proved to be so when I compared it with my Rolleiflex. That, plus the dim viewing screen (my Rolleiflex has a Maxwell Hi-Lux screen) convinced me to sell the Yashicamat. Looked nice but wasn't quite up to expectation.
Click to expand...

I hear this a lot.
Yashica is by no means of Rollei optical quality and never intended to be.

The Yashinon lens can stand on its own an produces fine quality images, sharp and with excellent contrast.

Along with the 65 Yashica TLRs that I once had I have also owned 7 Rollei and 5 Mamiya TLRs (not all at once) and during my 20 years behind the camera earning a living all three makes were put to use at one time or another.

When it came to CLAs the Rolleis required more than the Mamiya which in turn was on par with the Yashica. The Japanese shutters seemed to be able to maintain accuracy far better than the Compurs and when left sitting for a long period of time would not go 'off' to the same extent as the Compurs would.

That being said I still have a Rolleicord V and the little Xenar lens performs a treat. CLAs required on this over the past 10 years is, 3 - my Yashica 635 of 15 years, none - both camers receive approx. the same amount of use.

Regards
Peter
 
Last edited:
A friend lent me a 124G and I liked it a lot, so I found myself a much older (and cheaper) Yashicamat with the same Yashinon lens. The earlier camera is noticeably heavier and seems sturdy as a tank.
 
Just wondering, how does the original 'Mat compare to a Rolleiflex of the same era (a T perhaps)?

I have the first Yashicamat, and it definately doesn't feel filmsy or like it's gonna fall apart in my hands. In fact, it feels excellent, but I don't really have anything to compare it to.
I'm not looking for speculations, but opinions of people who have held (and preferably used) both cameras.

Part of me wants to save up for a nice Rolleiflex, but I can't justify it to myself, because I'm not going to win much. I'm happy with the lens on the Yashica, and as I said, the build quality doesn't feel bad at all.
 
Last edited:
The screen on my Mat 124 was very good, I'd say it's as good as the RZ67 that's on my Rolleiflex.

I'd agree on the optical and build quality of the Yashica Mat compared to a Rolleiflex : I've owned a Yashica and still have a Rolleiflex, and for the films I shot when I woned and used both, I can't tell which camera was used for which film.

The "plain" Yashica mat (124 "non G") was as well built as my Rolleiflex, it's only that the noise (particularly when winding) is very different, and I prrefer the Rolleiflex's silence.
 
I've owned a Yashica Mat 124 G, bought about 1975. It didn't feel as heavy as my current Rolleiflex, but maybe I was younger. It certainly performed well and was reasonable robust. I once droped it on its side onto a pointed rock. I would no longer wind all the way, but had to be ratcheted. But it continued to work until it was stolen about two months later (I bet that was a surprised theif). I found the meter to be right on.

In operation, I think I preferred the Yashica. Of course I don't have them to compare side by side, but I don't think the negatives were that much worse on the Yashica. Hard to tell since I hardly ever use the Rolleiflex. It just doesn't stand up to the Super Press 23.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom