Rolleiflex 3.5 Planar vs. Yashica Mat 124g | WHICH FILM CAMERA IS BETTER??

[@imrannuri]

Something I forgot to mention in the video is that the Yashica Mat 124g is prone to lens separation or haziness more than the Rolleiflex. It's very much fixable, but you may want to factor in an extra $150 in its price when you consider that you'll more than likely send it off for a CLA at some point. A CLA is worth it in my opinion, but definitely something to keep in mind.

[@matthewdeepblue]

Thanks so much

[@Von_McKnelly]

I've had a Yashica TLR for 20 years and a Rolleiflex for 10 years. Both rock and so much fun to work with. Freaking little work tanks in my opinion.

[@imrannuri]

Agreed! Glad you can back up this video with a decade of experience 🤠

[@NoosaHeads]

The Xenotar is the sharper lens. The Planar has a slightly smoother background (bokeh) but if it's crisp pictures you want, the Xenotar is the best choice. Possibly for portraits that are soft lit, the Planar might be the one to go for.

[@cameronkrause4712]

you can't go wrong with either of those 2 lenses.

[@ghosttownsentinel5288]

I would get a Minolta Autocord instead, to be honest. Do a comparison of the Minolta and the Yashica TLRs. Rolleiflex is not a good comparison with a Yashica because of price difference, even if one might say the output is almost similar. Also, in these examples, the Rolleiflex has more definition. If you can't see that, you need to see an eye doctor. Seriously! But, Yashica Mat should do fine with the way it shoots.........and for that much cheaper!

The Mat 124G is absolutely underrated. It is a very capable camera for the fraction of the budget of a Rolleiflex.

[@Oelgo]

Not gonna lie, I have almost the same 'double-set' of TLR's, a Rolleiflex 3,5 C (without build-in meter) and Yashica Mat 124G. Of course I also did such a comparsion an came almost to the same conclusion as you - both cameras do not give themselves much, the results are almost indistinguishable in therms of resolution, overall sharpness and contrast. No wonder, the 3,5 Yashinon ist just a very good ripp-off of the 3,5 Planar. Often said contrast weakness and stray light sensitivity oft the Yashinon ist very overrated, I've taken many backlit shots with good contrast and almost no flares! Sure, micro-contrast of the Planar is unbeatable, so the pictures look a bit warmer and tone richer, but only on a very low level compared to the Yashinon. Nothing the extra-money for the 'Flex would be worth it (my cameras where both gifts, I wouldn't pay those prices for a 'Flex myself... ;)). The only true difference ist the captured field of view, because the Planar is an 75mm lens, while the Yashinon is just an 80mm lens. A little difference, but because of the big 6x6 format, it has an effect! Its like comparing a modern 50mm standard lens with an older 55 - 58mm standard lens for a 135 format SLR. On some comparsion photos, made from a tripod on the same spot, the slightly narrower field of view oft the Yashica Mat 124G was at least the only thing I could tell the pictures apart from the Rolleiflex 3,5 C... And, of course, the 'Mat is noticeably lighter than the more refined and sturdier-build 'Flex.

[@imrannuri]

Glad to hear another person who can back up my conclusion from their own experience!!

[@BillyHopscotch]

I recently traded for a Rolleiflex 3.5T, and it replaced my Yashicamat. The Rollei is just a little bit better mechanically, and the Yashicamat had some issues even after a CLA. That said, the images are basically identical and if you've got a good Yashica, you're golden!

[@imrannuri]

This is spot on! I totally should have mentioned in the video that the Yashica's taking lens is prone to separation and haze. A good CLA can fix it, but still not something you want to deal with in the first place. Congrats on the new Rolleiflex!

[@BillyHopscotch]

@@imrannuri Sad but true. I'd say you proved the Yashica is no slouch, though!

[@old_guard2431]

The 3.5T would have been a more fair comparison. Basically a Rolleicord with a crank, it uses connect-the-dots loading, like the Yashica. The four-element Tessar is more comparable to the Yashica lens, which I imagine is a Tessar clone. The 3.5T would come in closer to the Yashica’s price point, also. The primary advantage of the Planar would be at the wider apertures. The Tessar does not really start to shine until you get to about f/8, and then it is demon sharp, particularly the recomputed Tessar on the 3.5T. The primary advantage of the f/2.8 viewing lens is more accurate focusing. Although a brighter screen is certainly a plus. (Not faulting the presenter for “failing” to get a 3.5T for a more fair comparison. Although it does not have the cult following of the Planar Rolleis, the price of a 3.5T in good condition is not trivial. And he already has two good TLRs.)

[@andrewglover9769]

Many years ago I heard that Yashica was stopping production of the 124G...they were blowing them out at the NY stores for $99 new in the box....now if you go on ebay the same camera is $800+ NIB. I've never had/seen a 124g with separation but maybe I've been lucky...a heads up for a great TLR is the Minolta Autocord....silent knob wind(less noise and stuff to go wrong) as well as a lens thats the sharpest I've tested.

[@randallstewart1224]

Yashica stopped producing the 124g in 1986. They tried to sell down their stock of 124g units for three years with little success. In 1989 they discounted the whole remaining warehouse of units to B&H in NYC. B&H slapped a $89.99 price on them and still took more than a year to clear them out. Fault of the camera? Not really. Medium format TLRs were unpopular. I'm not sure if Mamiya was still selling their TLRs by then. The most costly Rolleiflex, the 2.8F or 3.5F, sold (used) for less than $600, often much less. Otherwise, the drag on the 124g was its simply terrible lens, the same lens Yashica used since 1959. Its resolution is half that of the Rollei Planars, and the hobby mags were not shy about doing technical tests and telling the truth about such things then. Today, so few people make large optical prints than the relatively terrible performance of the 124g is lost in a shuffle of scanning, digital "sharpening" and inkjet printing.

[@Magnusscipioiterum]

The Planar is far more sharper than a redone Tessar. No comparison.

[@matt.coburn]

I have a Yashica 635, which is a little older (I believe) than the 124-G but it has served me exceptionally well. I don't even worry about the 35mm adapter that's available for it which I don't have because I have a great SLR if I want to shoot 35mm. I would recommend a Yashica to anyone who's thinking about trying a TLR without a moment's hesitation.

[@lichtmaler]

I have owned a YashicaMat124G and have now a Rolleifex 2.8GX. Definately not going back to the Yashica. What are my plusses for the Rolleifleix: The Rolleiflex is having a mechanism that adjusts the groundglass position according to the focussing. The Yashica does not do that so you are sometime off in the composition. It does not have a split imagage either which makes it harde to focus precise. The groundglass on Rolleiflex 2.8 is very bright. The Rolleiflex will allow you to do double exposures which I use every once and then. The Yashica does not do that. I don´t think the Yashica is as sharp on the lens as the Planar. I do see a difference in large scans. But I am using the 2.8 not the 3.5. I bought my Rolleilfex for 950 Euros. Now the pricing has gone to esoteric areas so for trying square format Yashica is a great choice. I bough my Yashica for 100 euros back then. I think now they ask for 400? Also no longer cheap.

[@davewyman]

Later Rolleiflex models came with cases that allowed the front portion to be removed. This allowed the use of an accessory front part of the case to cover the front of the camera as well as the massive pentaprism, which the flips the reversed image in the view finderback to normal and brings the camera up to eye level.

[@ast3663]

a Planar is a different lens, it has six glas elements, the Yashinon is a simpler Tessar type with four elements..guess why the Planar is more expensive..look how smooth the Planar renders backgrounds, really beautyful..compare with portraits. Both cameras are good.

[@ghw7192]

I have several versions of both cameras. There is no contest with film winding'--the Rolleiflex wins hands down for smoothnss, but for focusing, the Yashca is far easier. I prefer the regular Yashica-Mat to the G as it had a grid screen and I like that. Very good video. The lab can make the difference in the color temperature. I paid $350for my 3.5E Rolleifles, so shop around.

[@randallstewart1224]

I agree that for the price of a Rolleiflex, particularly one with the premium lens shown here, for most people buying a much less costly TLR and using the money saved for film, processing, etc. makes far more sense. In the other hand, the idea of paying $300 for a Yashicamat 124G, which is actually closer to $400 now, makes me toss my cookies. Basically, the Yashicamat is a 1950s TLR design made out of recycled tuna cans, sporting a lens which must be the worst quality lens of its general design (Tessar-copy) ever sold on a TLR. It's a $150 TLR when compared to the half dozen alternatives available. How can I say this? Well, I went through a TLR phase years ago and on-film tested half a dozen TLRs, all mounting a similar design of 4-element lens, including a Rolleiflex T and a 124G. The best mechanical camera was the Rolleiflex (no surprise). The best lens was clearly the Rokkor on a Minolta Autocord. Most others (Rolleicord, Ricoh Diacord) were nearly as good. The Yashica was outstandingly less capable than all others. Simply put, the Yashicamat at its best aperture offered more than 25% less resolution than the others. At its wider apertures, less than half that of the others. At $75 -150, the "Mat is a great first camera for anyone trying out a TLR. As to the other cameras I tested, some were bought and some were borrowed, but all but the Rolleiflex cost less than $300, some as little as half that amount.

[@steffenrosmus9177]

When Yashika started to import mat 124 cameras to Germany the onstruction leaflet says, :" for spare parts contact Francke & Heidecke (Rollei) in Braunschweig". So it seems the camera was an real clone down to the metric screws. I still have both in my collection and the lenses of the Rollei are an bit better.

[@tylerhuttosmith]

Rolleicords are also nice and affordable

[@lupindeweir]

Both are great cameras. The Rolleiflex purrs though, and doesn't shed.

[@OrelRussia]

Could you, please, tell me why the Vivian Maier's photos look so differently good not only in the composition way but also optically? In my opinion, the sharpness and out of focus transitions in many her photos look just phenomenal! I haven't seen anything like in images shot on Yashica. And, as far as I understand, it corresponds not only to her photographs shot on Rolleiflexes 80/2.8 but also to on 75/3.5.

[@Whywas6scared]

Great comparison, thank you. I had to put it on 0.75x speed though. You talk very fast 😂

[@imrannuri]

Haha you can tell I spend too much time on TikTok 😂 so much information to fit into such little time!

[@LoFiAxolotl]

Yeah honestly.... if you didn't put what cmaera you shot the pictures on under them.... could've been shot with either especially when not especially looking for differences you can't see any and if someone told me both were shot with the same camera i'd think it's plausible... Yashica made some amazing TLR and also their rangefinder are suprisingly good

[@fotosoldier]

I have both a Rolleiflex 3.5F w/ planar lens and a Yashica Mat-124G. The Yashica is indeed a fabulous camera and I love using it. Wonderfully sharp results and beautiful bokeh. However, I do prefer the viewfinder on my Rolleiflex and the Rolleiflex being quieter and better built. But otherwise, the Yashica is a fantastic value. Great review video 👍🏻

[@a7xandria198]

Excellent comparison video, good sir. Very informative and well presented.

[@imrannuri]

Thank you! And thanks for watching! 😁

[@mitHundundRad]

I have the Seagull 4A and the camera, which is traded in Germany for less than 100€, takes sharp and clear pictures. Top camera, quiet, cheap, only the focusing screen could be brighter at the edge.

[@anta40]

The Rollei is definitely the better camera, if one day you are going to re-sell it, because the price of European gears are slowly but steadily increasing. But if you are only interested in making pictures... hmm doesn't really matter. Can't decide? Flip a coin. Can't go wrong with either one.

[@darkviking1109]

It is just those small difference make the price difference. Of course the brand is one of them. I owned 124G and Rolleiflex 3.5 both. 124G is surprisingly good in image, even sharper than planar in center IMO. But I like the tune and bokeh of Planar more, smoother or creamer. Other noticeable advantage includes smaller factor, auto stop when film loading, and most important the viewfinder. IMO, rolleiflex’s viewfinder is best design in that year. even better than Hasselblad 503cw’s. How it folds, and able to use at eye level while still be able to focus. I think the 600$ difference is just nonlinear of ROI in design. The first 500 bucks make big difference, but the next 500 difference only make slightly good.

[@pedrosuarez201]

Wow a really awesome video. Also I have the same sous vide :)

[@youravantgarde]

I have a yashica and it's amazing. I always wondered how much better a rollie could possibly be.

[@jondr.8933]

It's like comparing a basic car with a luxury one. I sit in traffic every day. I'm getting to my destination at the same time as my colleagues, but there paying 300% more to do it. I'm board in my cheap box, so are they. They have some more comfort, they look cool. The outcome is the same. No doubt there car is a joy, I just don't want to pay the extra for a minimal difference.

[@imrannuri]

This is a good analogy for it! To add to it, if you can afford the luxury option, you'll love it. But do you NEED it? Not really!

[@jackmcgonigle9156]

I've owned a 124G, a Rolleiflex E3 2.8 Planar, and a Mamiya 330. I traded in the 124G for the Rollei, and I still have the 330. I found the Rollei to have better build quality but the 124G was easier to use and the image quality was excellent for both. For some reason, I found the Rollei to be difficult to focus. I gifted it to my granddaughter who loves it. The 330 is big, bulky and versatile and works great when you can use a tripod or work in a studio. I have all the lenses except for the 65mm.

[@StreetPhotographyChina]

I have BOTH cameras and 100% agree that the Yashica is almost as good, so unless you have a ton of money to throw around, you can't go wrong with the Yashica.

[@rowantuckfield1193]

I love informed, balanced and truly helpful reviews and this is right up there. I've had both these cameras for 30 years and Imran is 150% right on the money. The only way I got my hands on the 3.5e was finding it under a table at a swap meet for USD$165. Carrying the 3.5e around in my backpack everywhere I've gone for 30 years (beach included) repairs and servicing (bloody sand) is an issue. Back in the day there were skilled rolleiflex repairerers in all major cities. Sadly not anymore. I wonder if there is a difference between them visa vie repairability and cost. Also, I only shoot B&W and wonder if a side by side would be any different to colour neg. Thanks for the great review Imran!

[@imrannuri]

Thanks for the kind words!! I also mostly shoot B&W on these cameras and tend to get similar results for that too

[@KhunTui-jl5nj]

Hello again, 124G have function Double exposure ? The feeling when holding it. Is it different? Which one feels more solid and easier to assemble? Maybe compare 124, Rolleiflex, 124G.

[@Jambi555]

lubitel reigns supreme

[@buyaport]

3 Advantages of the Rolleiflex: It does not need batteries for its light meter (you can get a substitute for the original mercury battery of the Yashica, but it is hard to get). It has a depth of field indicator, and you can set the filter factor if using yellow, orange or red filters. And one quirk I noticed with the Yashica: It does not react on Foma films -- it never stops if you wind them in until you wound the whole film through. I love both of them, and mostly use the Yashica, but this is because mine was never used when I bought it, so it is like a new camera, while my Rollei lets me feel its age.

[@txng]

This is such a great comparison. Just discovered your channel. Gonna check out your 13-week trip 👀

[@imrannuri]

Woo thank you!!

[@mengmiao3543]

wrong calculation. When I buy a rolleiflex and I use it for a couple of years. I can sell it at almost the same price as I buy it today if the camera maker is not too volatile… so I only pay for the depreciation, which is quite small if I use it very carefully

[@jamestdawson]

My photographic mentor studied with Ansel Adams and Minor White at various Masterclasses. I forget at which one, but when asked what was the best camera they replied "The one you have with you."

[@tgchism]

I picked up a copy of the Yashica Mat 124g that absolutely looked fantastic for $200! However, my in experience with the camera meant I didn't recognize that the film advance wasn't working correctly until I tried to load my first roll of film in it. I sent it off to be repaired and CLA which means the camera is going to end up costing much more to have a working copy! It is due to be delivered tomorrow so I hoping for the best and I'm still excited about the using the camera!

[@ductritran8637]

Yashica is better for you to shot with brighter screen , the rolleiflex too dim made hard to get accurate focus plus the magnifier glass is a plus . Price is 1/3 I’m go for the yashica 124G . 😊

[@Humungojerry]

something i don’t think you mentioned is that the rolleiflex are better made, so less likely to go wrong. mechanism inside the yashica mat isn’t so durable. ive got a yashica mat 124 (not the g) and the shutter got stuck. i got it repaired but it’s worth noting. apparently not a good idea to turn the film advance without film in it, as it can screw up the mechanism. all that said i feel less nervous taking my yashica mat out than i would with a pristine rolleiflex! PS kudos for putting the conclusion first, a breath of fresh air 😊

[@imrannuri]

Yep this is all correct! I should have mentioned it more but you're totally right that Rolleiflex are built better. A good CLA for a 124g is worth it though if you do go that route. Should prevent any major issues.

[@jiji00321]

I had 2 124g, they are great BUT they are too fragile in my opinion, foggy lens & rewind crank stuck are pretty common issues. I never owned a rolleiflex but from what I've heard they are built better

[@lupindeweir]

I've had a MAT 124 and a MAT 124G and I've also (still) have a Rolleiflex C and a rolleicord. I bought them all used and the build quality on the 124G was pretty bad (just as likely to have been beaten to death) compared to the MAT. Basically felt like the difference between the Flex and the Cord although not quite as pronounced . They all four would flame other cameras as far as picture quality.

[@thecascadian3198]

As a caution, it sometimes takes years to see what the nuances of rendering are. I see a vast differences. Even at the miniscule enlargements you are providing on the screen. The Rollei produces images that are more real looking, you get a sense of dimensionality that the Yashica does not give. When magnified more, it becomes even more apparent. If you are looking to make art pieces and to elicit an emotional response from the viewer, the Yashica is limiting to a degree the Rollei is not.

[@dinorossi6611]

I got lucky. I bought both, new, minty, for a thousand bucks and even got them CLAd by the still-living pros.

[@gentleman-shutterbug]

Great video. I've not used a TLR yet, but it's nice to see a side-by-side comparison. I also like to hear the gears in mechanical cameras, though I've never been crazy about the mirror slap sound you get from SLRs.

[@dylannoriega2236]

Glad you did such a great side by side comparison bro 🙏💪

[@LeVampire666]

Man, thanks for the great video! I just have Rolleiflex 3.5A Xenar and colors are disappointing in general for me, also changed the viewfinder glass to Rick Olesson plastic screen, its brighter but thikness is different so focus is not exact sometimes. Is it worth it to change to Yashica 124? I have close-up rolleinar bay i adapter and its really cool thing, does it fits to yashica?

[@imrannuri]

I think you would see a slightly better image in terms of color and contrast with the YN124g! But that's not to say the 3.5a is a bad camera so don't sweat about it!

[@rjcason98]

I own the Yashicamat 124g And a Yashica A. The 124 is better but the A is more affordable

[@Magnusscipioiterum]

Nothing beats the Planar 3.5 or the 2.8.

[@davidjackson7675]

Are Rolleflex still being made?

[@imrannuri]

Nope!

[@nathangv]

What if the rolleiflex is free?

[@imrannuri]

Rule #1 of photography: never say no to a free Rolleiflex 🤪

[@markbrown1609]

I have both cameras , both cams are very good, the Japanese twin is much newer. I bought both together at estate auction. I'm holding the yashica in my hand as I type this; I assure it's not a toy or feels like a toy. unlike the rollie, the yashica functions are 100%. Both cameras will blow the socks of any new full frame camera. The rollei looks more nostalgic, ..they are both quite and stealthy . Load it with tri x or Ilford . The Rollei and Agfa German film was great combo. Minolta also made a sweet TLR . 120 medium format black white negs blows the socks off my Nikon 36 mp full frame... the photos look like what photos are supposed to look like.

[@sunbeamlands7]

Most people that get all geeky about their Rolleis or Leicas aren’t shooting! Buy more film before more cameras. BTW, my Rolleicord IV with its Schneider Xenotar is my favorite camera. You give up sharpness for the 2.8. I’ve had it since 1990 and will always have it. Equipment is never the limiting factor. Look at Ansel’s and Weston’s gear…

[@imrannuri]

Exactly! It's too easy to let gear FOMO get in the way from just going out and making photos. Obviously gear plays an important role in it all, but it's not everything

[@neilpiper9889]

Schneider Xenar on Rolleicord cameras. Xenotar only on Rolleiflex

[@old_guard2431]

Good point. The collectors have skewed the market at the expense of photographers. Back in the dawn of time, older models of premium cameras were inexpensive enough that I could get a dual-stroke Leica M3 while working as a photographer’s assistant at minimum wage. Forget about that these days - the same camera would be substantially more expensive now as well as worse for wear.

[@slothsarecool]

shoot what you enjoy and can afford, Leica’s are fantastic robust cameras

[@Zetaphotography]

lol most people that complained about Leica or Rollei never had one.

[@dont-want-no-wrench]

looks to me like the rollei is slightly less exposure on most of those. maybe shutter is off a little on one or the other camera

[@imrannuri]

It's definitely possible!

[@vedranr.glavina7667]

Superb Imran ! Congrats ! Did you have a hood on both ?

[@imrannuri]

No hood on either of them! Definitely wouldn't hurt to have one though

[@Ohaney76]

More love for my yashica thanks for the review

[@robin9339]

if you want a rollei. get the rolleicord they are great and just slightly more expensive. the built quality is great and lens is very good!

[@davidpiper3652]

I have owned both, they were stolen a few years ago. I replaced the Yashica and I have been very happy with it. It's £1000 to get another good 'flex and I can justify spending that much.

[@markbrown1609]

The TLR is a fine art tool, like a quality paint brush and canvas, very simplistic so the photographer can concentrate on the image.

[@cward2965]

The Yashica Mat 124g was my first tlr and still use it all the time, super fun camera to focus with. The Carl Zeiss fanboy in me has always wanted a Rollei, but I've wanted film to actually go shoot more than another camera.

[@wullieg7269]

my rollie has 1rst magnifier you showed

[@michaelharmon721]

I think you should check the price for the yashica mat it’s high then what you said in the video.

[@CalumetVideo]

I agree most YashicaMat 124G’s that are CLA’ed are selling in the 500-600.00 range.

[@rolandthomasset1713]

Hi ! Yes’ I agree, they are both excellent. However, the difference in price over the years, will fade out and you will find the Rollei to be superior in small but significant ways. First, you should pay a lot of attention to the sports finderand its unique focusing loop right under the open sportwindow. It seems that many ignore its usefulness ! I use it so many times. Both focusing loops can be replaced with a different one but not easy to find these days. Please check this out. My first TLR was a Zeiss Ikoflex, then I saved and bought my 3.5 Rollei. I also used the Yashica and the Minolta. All great cameras at different prices. Thank you for the video.

[@Gosk]

Film Photography Project shirt!!

[@devroombagchus7460]

You call quiet advance stealthy?

[@oldmanmikey]

But it ain’t a Rollie

[@cta.k.a.barrychan2460]

That rain jacket is hella fresh! Just ONE of the MANY things I'd tell my younger self if I could go back is, "Yellow is not an ugly color. You liked the Canary Ruf, the Canary Focus SVT, the yellow 90s Viper and the yellow Power Ranger. Don't front."

[@imrannuri]

Hahah at least you know it now!! Thanks man!!

[@Usiris23]

“Also I’m brown…” 😂😂😂 made me lol

[@羅宇志]

I have a Minolta Auotcord and recently get a Rolleiflex 3.5f. I tested the two cameras in gold 200. The results show that Autocord is a little bit softer at corner under f3.5 and no noticeable difference under f8. Both are very good camera and you can just buy the Japanese one if you have a tight budget

[@andrewglover9769]

I've been on a TLR kick lately and bought a few of them....the Autocord/Rolleicord V/124G and a Wardflex. The AUtocord is the sharpest followed by the Yashica, the Rollei is visibly softer, even the ward flex is sharper! I bought a second Rolle to make sure I didn't have a bad one and I'm still waiting for the roll to finish to get the result.

[@lupindeweir]

@@andrewglover9769 A CLA and (attention to the transport) will likely do wonders for your V. Plus you'd be good to go for another 50 years.

[@toxotis70]

what ligh meter did you used ?

[@aaronahn864]

Hey! what's the background music you used at the end? Thanks!

[@MattWeddis]

You’re making me want to buy more cameras. Great and unbiased comparison.

[@imrannuri]

Thanks for watching Matt! It's hard not to love the Yashica Mat 124g honestly

[@MattWeddis]

@@imrannuri you’ve definitely put your through it’s paces.

[@bwinston]

I have a Rolleiflex 2.8e and I'm really impressed with the Yashica. The images actually have a slightly more "vintage" feel about them which I think I actually prefer!

[@peterkay9050]

Excellent video. I have the yashica mat......and film :)

[@ricardorodriguez218]

Got my Rolleiflex 3.5 E Planar for the price I would have paid for a Yashicamat 124g, Had the Yashicamat for like 4 years, both are really great gear!

[@thegroove2000]

Splitting hairs.

[@DavidGriffin]

Aye bro... Keep doing your thing.

[@jean-claudemuller3199]

The Yashica Mat 124 I used a lot in the seventieth has a 4 elements Tessar type lens that is perfection at f:11 but somewhat soft at full aperture f:3.5 The Planar lens is really sharper at bigger apertures f:2.8 - 5.6

[@paxYmo]

Good job

[@davidjenkins8009]

Being old enough to have used both cameras when they were being manufactured, they are both really excellent. The Rollei is a better built camera, I always thought the Yashica felt a little ropy in use, although they always proved totally reliable. I would definitely concur that in terms of image quality, there is not much to choose between them. In truth, any of the 120 cameras made at that time could produce great results and the differences in quality would only show at around a 20x24 print of above. Even then, the differences would be very small. Really up until about the late 1980's Carl Zeiss lenses were as good or better than the alternatives but not by very much. After that time, it is hard to ignore Fujifilm the GX680 lenses which are really amazing if again a little cheap in feel due to the plastic construction. Hasselblad did swap to Fuji lenses for the H models. I think the message in your video was clear, don't so much worry about the camera, get out and take some photos and enjoy your hobby. I agree totally!

[@westonsmith4572]

Sunbeamlands7, the Rolleicord has a Xenar f3.5 lens. Cheers from Canada

[@virmann.2137]

yess surr

[@KhunTui-jl5nj]

I'm glad I came to see this video. I'm interested in looking for a camera that uses 120 film. And this clip made me decide to buy a Yashica Mat 124G. (I have a Rolleiflex 4*4 that uses 127 film.)

[@imrannuri]

Awesome! Enjoy it!!

[@KhunTui-jl5nj]

@@imrannuri How many size picture you scan to computer ?. It's so clear and Sharp .

[@JonnyEnglish-gu1cs]

I have a yashica mat 124G it’s absolutely beautiful produces gorgeous images I have the Yashica every day

[@GigiDAmico]

zeiss lens....

[@bellakaldera3305]

I had a Yashicamat 124 with the wide angle and telephoto converters.

[@davewyman]

I love this review. I have several Rolleiflex cameras and I have no doubt, especially after watching your review, that the image quality of a Yashica Mat won't disappoint anyone lucky enough to own and shoot with one. I do think your conclusions of what you're seeing with the paired images, though, don't always agree with what I'm seeing. I'll give one example: the photo of your self-reflecting images in the mirrors. Your image in reflection in the photo with the Yashica Mat is a little smaller than your image in reflection in the Rolleiflex photo. It looks like you were standing a little closer to the mirror when you used the Rollei. Yet when you look closely - very closely - at the backgrounds in each photo, the more distant objects are larger in the Yashica Mat photo. How can this be? It's because the Yashica Mat has an 80 mm lens as opposed to the 75 mm lens on the Rolleiflex. The slightly longer lens of the Yashica Mat will make the background look slightly larger that the shorter lens of the Rollei will. Differences in the size of objects in two similar photos will have at least a slightly different effect when it comes to perceiving brightness and saturation. Which means focal length might have as much to do with the way a photo looks as does the way the lens transmits light. Either way, though, your test shows very small quality and visual differences between the two cameras. 😅

[@tomw3241]

Nice video. I can agree to most of the outcome - that it basically gives pretty simmilar pictures. But Yashica Mat is not based on Rolleiflex mechanical design. It is rather Rolleicord design with added crank. There is a magnifficent yashicatlr site that will explain it to you. And offcourse lenses also differes but you just have to push it hard in some more advanced tests to see it.

[@Zetaphotography]

Great video. Picked up a damaged 124G off ETSY. Sent to Mark Hama. 4 months later I got a great working camera including accurate light meter. I have 220 film that came out great.

[@paulhyde1834]

I fell in love with my 124G forty years ago! Now I've got 6 of them!!!

[@12justinmuise]

mad respects for the chapter format and the honest approach to video making! beautifully shot video 🤠

[@neilpiper9889]

I use a 1957 Yashica Mat with a 75mm 3.5 Lumaxar lens. Everything works perfectly. I love it.

[@Zetaphotography]

Haha “I’m Brown” I feel you. Shooting while brown gets me caught with my Leica all the time, but when I shoot with a WLF I go unnoticed

[@praless]

I would suggest a YashicaMat - EM or LM as well. They are all metal (in comparison to 124g) and have the same yashinon lens. And I believe you can get them cheaper.

[@korea-aliexpress]

Very useful video. Thanks.

[@ayakuun]

👍👍👍👍👍

[@michaeltroster9059]

Many years ago when I was a medical student my parents bought me a Yashicamat twin lens reflex camera( this was in the early 1960’s. My older brother has a Rolleflex. The pictures, in my opinion were as good as those taken with the Rolle. The only difference was the mechanics in the Yashica were a bit cruder in that the shutter and the wind mechanism was noisier. Eventually the Yashica shutter broke and I was advised not to bother getting it repaired so I bought a used dingle lens reflex that Iacquired from the hospital photographer, and which lasted many years. Dollar for dollar I thought the Yashica was a good buy that gave me years of satisfactory service at far less cost than a Rollfe.

[@kencarnley7101]

I have a Yashica and love it. Paid $100 maybe 4 years ago. I purchased a new one in the 70s but it was stolen. When I am serious I get out the big boy. Mamiya c300.

[@bertushofstra8246]

I have a version of both camera’s (Yashica Mat and Rolleiflex E with 80mm 2.8). Reason I use the Yashica more is that it will be cheaper to replace if something happens to it 😊. Like you convincingly point out both camera’s produce great neg’s. The Yashica had severe haziness when I bought it, due to “oil” on the rear element. It was easy to unscrew and clean it though.

[@hansemannluchter643]

Why buy the hyped Yashica Mat 124G, when you can get the 124 for half, and buy even more film?