This is a copy of a post I made to Facebook.

YASHICA FX-A

Now here's something you may not have seen before, or ever see again, it's the rarest of Yashica SLRs, the FX-A.

There's not much information around about the FX-A. It was introduced at Photokina in 1982 but the plug was pulled on the project soon after and there was only, allegedly, around 1000 made, most of which, allegedly, were bought by the US Government. I'm not sure any of this can be verified but it's a fact that few were made and they rarely show up for sale.

The FX-A has built-in focus-assist so is a predecessor of the later Contax RX. It is not auto-focus and I, personally, can't see how it could ever have been an auto-focus camera as there are no couplings to the lens that would allow the lens to be controlled by the body. I think this was only ever going to be a focus-assist system, just like the RX. At the same time, Yashica were developing a AF version of the Contax 137 which may have been a full auto-focus system - we'll never know.

The FX-A has been described as similar to the FX-D. In fact it has very little similarity to the FX-D and it would be misleading to say it is. It is a generation later than the FX-D and the style and build are much more similar to the FX-70 and the FX-103. Both of these cameras came later so it seems some of the development of the FX-A did not go unused and appeared in these later cameras. The shutter, particularly, is different than the FX-D or any earlier cameras but the same shutter was carried over into the FX-70 and FX-103. Other parts and assemblies also got reused in the later cameras.

If I am being perfectly honest, the FX-A, along with the FX-70 and FX-103, are not built as well as the FX-D. Maybe this was the result of cost cutting measures, perhaps due to Yashica's financial woes of the time prior to the Kyocera take-over.

It seems the camera was intended to have a number of accessories including a winder and a data (or date) back. There are four winder contacts on the base suggesting the winder would be based on the Contax 159 winder which also has four contacts. But one of the contacts on the FX-A is not connected so it would have had less functionality. The Contax 139 winder fits and works as intended. The later FX-103 also had four contacts and a winder which looks identical to the Contax 139 winder so this was probably what was intended for the FX-A. The 139 winder only needs two contacts though so I don't know why they included more.

The camera has a data back LED to trigger the data back each time the shutter is released. So a data back was planned. This eventually appeared with the FX-103.

Other functions include a flash ready contact in the hot shoe. This works with the Contax TLA20 but I've not checked it with any other flash models. There is no TTL flash. This was introduced with the FX-103.

There is also a self timer switch on the front of the camera which also provides a momentary exposure lock.

There is one thing about the camera I have failed to understand. At the top of the lens mount is a switch which is activated by the lens maximum aperture tab. Normally this tab tells the body the maximum aperture of the lens which it uses for displaying the aperture in use. But the FX-A doesn't display the aperture and, what's more, this is just a switch, not a variable resistance or a digital encoder as is found on other bodies to indicate the aperture. So what this switch was intended for I don't know. It just seems to tell the body that a lens has been attached and no more.

My example of the FX-A appeared recently on ebay. I was lucky. It had only just been put on when I saw it. The buy-it-now button has never been pressed so fast. There was no information other than it was untested so I expected it not to work. But on inspection it powered-up and the lights came on, including the focus indicators, but the shutter wouldn't fire. I also noted the mirror had slipped. Two common problems with Yashica SLRs. Having fixed these problems many times in the past on other Yashica (and Contax) models, I had no hesitation to attempt repairing the camera albeit knowing there would be some differences. The main difference, of course, is the additional modules and circuitry for the focus assist. This has caused the flexible circuit board to be enlarged and increased in complexity which makes removal, required to enable the camera to be dismantled, somewhat more complex and time consuming. Overall I spent nearly two days repairing and servicing the camera. The camera now works as intended and has also had a full service carried out.

The leatherette covers on the camera were perished as usually happens. Strangely, the cover around the grip is rubber and was in perfect order. I've replaced the other covers with some I had and have fitted a rubber thumb grip to the back which I think compliments the front grip quite well.

The focus-assist works well in good light with a contrasty subject. But it becomes less reliable as brightness and contrast reduces. There are no other focus aids in the viewfinder so you either rely on the focus assist or use the matt area of the screen to focus.

The FX-A is now a collectors item. I don't see this as a users camera. It's quirky and interesting to use (once) but will then sit on the shelf I'm sure. I'm not really a collector so if anyone is interested in becoming the owner of this FX-A, make me an offer. It will have to be a good one though.

I've attached a selection of photos taken during the repair for anyone interested in the internals.

Yashica FX-3 Super 4000 part II

Following on from my previous post of the same title. The KF-M1 lingered in pieces for a couple of months until I finally decided to convert it to a Contax/Yashica lens mount. I've converted Phenix made, Yashica based, cameras before but from Pentax K mount to C/Y. That was fairly straight forward and I expected this to be the same - I was wrong. Converting from a Nikon mount to a C/Y mount turned out to be more difficult. The main issues were due to the way the Nikon mount transfers aperture information to the body which meant the metering circuit was different and also due to the shorter flange to film distance and the wider lens mount causing some mechanical differences.

Without going into all the details, essentially, I replaced the KF-M1 mirror box and viewfinder along with the meter circuit with the same from a Yashica FX-3. The increased range of shutter speeds is a slight issue and, as it now stands, the meter doesn't work if the 1/4000 shutter speed is selected. That's not really an issue. I also added a grip, replaced the shutter speed knob as the original was difficult to grip, and fitted new covers. As I replaced the viewfinder and metering system with the same from a Yashica FX-3 Super 2000, I also gained a flash ready signal in the viewfinder though that required the hot shoe to be replaced with one with the extra flash contact.

The shutter speeds were adjusted and the 1/4000 is just within specification but it's clear this shutter is struggling to reach the 1/4000 speed. Some further adjustment might improve it but I decided to leave it as it is. 

The same shutter, used in the Yashica Super 2000, but without the 1/4000 speed, exhibits almost identical characteristics and is already struggling to reach 1/2000. This isn't a match for the shutter used in the Contax S2 though, even that, can struggle to reach 1/4000.

Overall, I'm happy with the result. The camera handles well and with the increased weight of the metal top and bottom plates it feels more solid than a Yashica FX-3. Despite the fact I probably won't give it much use, I think it's a keeper.

Update: Despite my reservations about how much use I might give it, this has become a goto camera for me. I really like the handling of it. It's a bit noisy but it's an easy camera to use.

Canon EOS EF Eyecup will fit Contax and Yashica

The Kyocera F-3 eyecup was used on the Contax S2, 167, Aria and maybe other bodies. It also fits earlier bodies like the 139, 137 and 159 and also Yashica bodies like the FX-3, FX-D, FX-103 etc. I, personally, prefer it to the round eyecups that were used on the earlier Contax and Yashicas.

However, the Kyocera F-3 eyecup has become scarce and when they do become available they are expensive. So I looked for an alternative and found the Canon EOS EF eyecup fits perfectly. It's the same style as the Kyocera F-3 though slightly different in shape. Original Canon eyecups are available and are not expensive but there are Chinese made copies that are available very cheaply on ebay.

The Canon EF eyecup fits Canon EOS 350D, 400D, 450D, 500D, 550D, 600D, 1000D etc. bodies. There are other similar models so, if buying, check it's the correct one.

Here's a few pics of one I bought fitted to a FX-3, a 139 and the KF-M1 mentioned in my previous post.

And a couple of pictures of the eyecup itself.

Yashica FX-3 Super 4000 anyone?

 I recently acquired a Map KF-M1 camera. Made by Phenix in China using a Yashica FX-3 chassis, it has a Nikon lens mount and a top shutter speed of 1/4000 sec. It's the same camera as the Kenko KF-2N which was clearly an attempt to create a camera with the same specification as the Nikon FM-2n. The Map version was made exclusively for Map Camera in Japan and, unusually, has no branding on it. There was another version called the Phenix DN66 sold in the Chinese domestic market.

I was intrigued how the top shutter speed was achieved. The Nikon FM-2n uses the same Copal shutter as the Contax S2 and I knew that shutter will not physically fit into a Yashica FX-3 chassis - I've tried it. The shutter is larger and has slightly different mounting positions. So, to find out how it was done, I had to get a camera. All the variants are rare and, if you do find one, expensive. But I found a KF-M1 in China. The seller accepted an offer but it still cost me nearly £190 with the import tax paid.

With the camera dismantled, first inspection of the shutter suggested it was the same shutter as is fitted to the Yashica Super 2000 (and many other cameras) but it has an extra position on the shutter speed selector. A check of the shutter speeds shows it is struggling to get to 1/4000 and the general shape of the test results graph is very similar to that from a Yashica Super 2000.

(Note: The upper and lower limits on the above results sheet are from a Contax S2 and are not correct for the KF-M1. They should be the same as the FX-3 limits below.)

It's not unusual for the Yashica Super 2000 shutter to be slow at the top speed but some adjustment will usually bring it into specification. I'll have to see if I can get the KF-M1 shutter closer to what it should be.

So it appears Copal produced a further upgrade to the 2000 shutter, which was itself an upgrade of the original 1000 shutter as used in the original FX-3. So I'm surprised that a Yashica Super 4000 never appeared if the shutter was available and could be fitted with no modification to the existing FX-3 chassis. Maybe it was because it would be competing with the Contax S2.

Now I need to decide what to do with the dismantled KF-M1. I don't want a camera with a Nikon lens mount. I could fit the shutter into an existing FX-3 Super 2000 or I could fit a Yashica lens mount to the KF-M1. The camera is quite well made and, unlike the Yashica with plastic top and bottom plates, the KF-M1 has metal top and bottom. The focus screen is the original Yashica one with the diagonal split prism, which I don't like, but if I change the lens mount I'll also have to change the viewfinder so that's not an issue. Whatever I do, the camera is unlikely to get a lot of use from me so if someone out there has an urge to own a Yashica Super 4000, get in touch and we can discuss.

Update: There is now a part 2 to this post at https://contax139.blogspot.com/2021/02/yashica-fx-3-super-4000-part-ii.html

Yasuhara T981

I've created a new website for the above camera. Nothing Contax related but there is some Yashica interest. You can find it at www.t981.co.uk https://sites.google.com/site/t981yasuhara/home.

Zeiss -v- Yashica ML lenses - 200mm f/4

I've had the opportunity to do a side by side comparison of a couple of Zeiss and Yashica lenses. It's not the sort of thing I normally bother about but one of the lenses is the Yashica 200 f/4 ML C (compact) which has an excellent reputation and I was interested to see how it compared to its Zeiss equivalent. The other comparison is between the Yashica 50mm f/1.7 ML and its Zeiss equivalent. That will appear in another post (eventually). Sorry, won't be happening as I've sold the Yashica lens.

Zeiss                                     Yashica

The two lenses are very similar in size and weight. Here's the specifications for both:

	Elements/Groups	Angular field	Min. Focus	Aperture range	Size (mm)	Weight
Zeiss	6/5	12° 40’	1.5m	f/4 – f/32	66.5 x 122	550g
Yashica	5/4	12° 30’	2.5m	f/4 – f/22	64 x 113.5	535g

The Zeiss has a filter size of 55mm, the Yashica 58mm.

This is not a scientific comparison, just a few shots on each lens compared against each other. I attached the lenses to my Sony A7II and photographed the roof of a nearby house putting the corner of the roof alternately in the middle of the frame and in the corner of the frame. I took photographs at f/4, f/11 and f/22.

I also took photographs of some out of focus highlights and also of a blank wall to check for vignetting and another wall to check for distortion.

The last photographs of the wall (not shown here) showed both lenses have slight pincushion distortion with nothing to choose between them. What they also showed was the focal length of the  Yashica is about 95% of the Zeiss. This is contrary to what the specification suggests. I'm not able to measure the exact focal length but just did a comparison of the two.

Vignetting at f/4 was very similar with both lenses.

Yashica

Zeiss

The images of the out of focus highlights are similar.

Zeiss

Yashica

Here's the rest of the images to compare for sharpness and contrast. All the images are 100% crops.

Yashica centre f/4

Zeiss centre f/4

Yashica centre f/11

Zeiss centre f/11

Yashica centre f/22

Zeiss centre f/22

Yashica corner f/4

Zeiss corner f/4

Yashica corner f/11

Zeiss corner f/11

Yashica corner f/22

Zeiss corner f/22

Both lenses are showing chromatic aberration when used on my Sony A7II. More so towards the edge of the images as is usual. I don't think there's any significant difference between the two lenses though.

One area of difference between the lenses is their compatibility with converters. Zeiss made x1.4 (Mutar III) and x2 (Mutar II) converters specially matched to some of their lenses including the 200/4. These converters can't be used with the Yashica as they are mechanically incompatible. But other converters can be used including the Zeiss Mutar I x2 converter. I took some more photographs using the Mutar I and Mutar II converters. The images are 100% crops.

Yashica f/4 Mutar I

Zeiss f/4 Mutar II

Yashica f/8 Mutar I

Zeiss f/8 Mutar II

My conclusion is that there is negligible difference between the two lenses. Yes, you could say one is better than the other in some instances but it's not always the case that the Zeiss is better than the Yashica which is what might be expected. In normal use, I would be happy to use either based on these results.

FX-3 Super 2000 - spot the difference

Can you spot three differences between these bodies? (click on the images for larger versions).

So what's the difference and why.

The top one is the earlier version of the FX-3 Super 2000 (I call it the mk1), the bottom one is the later version (mk2). The visible differences are the strap lugs, the badge and the finish on the grip - the mk2 has a moulded finish to the grip while the mk1 has a stick on, leatherette, cover that matches the other covers.

There are a few internal differences as well but they are pretty insignificant. A few changes to the cover mouldings to reduce the part count mainly. I did replace the shutter in the top one of the two examples shown and found a slight difference between the one fitted and the spare one I had which may have come from a later camera. But it only required the swap of one gear to make it compatible.

I don't know why these changes were made. The later one appears slightly simpler in construction so it may have been a cost saving exercise to make assembly easier and quicker.

Anyone looking to buy an FX-3 shouldn't have any concern about the differences - they make no difference to the function or the reliability of the camera.

Note: In calling these two versions 'earlier' and 'later' or 'mk1' and 'mk2' I'm making assumptions about their age. I might be wrong. It's possible what I consider to be the later one might be the earlier one. But as the mk1 is more similar to the earlier versions of the FX-3 I'm assuming that one came first. It's also possible they were made in parallel but in different factories. If anyone has any information, I would be interested to see it.

Documents update

I've just added the Yashica FX-D repair manual to my documents page.

One useful item in it is a clear description of how to align the viewfinder LEDs. This is just as relevant to the 139 and as I always end up turning the wrong screw in the wrong direction, I'll be keeping a copy of this somewhere to hand.