Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

First images Topcor RE 100m f/2.8
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
caspert79 wrote:

Purple fringing wide open from the Tokina, but in terms of detail, this lens keeps on shocking me Smile


Which one keeps shocking you? The Tokina or the Minolta? To my eyes the Minolta looked a bit better than the Tokina when it came to details although it's so close it doesn't really matter.


Tokina has definitely more detail. Look at the level of detail where the green dot is. Does it matter for portraits? Not really.
Strong point of the Tokina is it’s versatility. Great bokeh for portraits. Great sharpness and contrast, macro ability and very good corners for landscape photography.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
caspert79 wrote:

Purple fringing wide open from the Tokina, but in terms of detail, this lens keeps on shocking me Smile


Which one keeps shocking you? The Tokina or the Minolta? To my eyes the Minolta looked a bit better than the Tokina when it came to details although it's so close it doesn't really matter.


I am getting old and going blind, but I see slightly more contrast from the Tokina at the focus point. I also see that once you move away from the focus point the Minolta is able to better maintain detail into the surrounding structures and leaves while the Tokina starts blurring.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I see what you mean. Probably there's some focal field curvature in the Minolta at short distances, whereas the Tokina, being a macro, has a flat field. It would explain why the leaf on the right is sharper, whereas the leaf on the left is more out of focus.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
Stevemark,

Don't misunderstand me as I appreciate the tests you do. However, testing a classic portrait focal length at infinity for corner sharpness is like slapping baby Jesus in the face.

Yes and no ... While the Topcor RE, being a classical Sonnar, probably was made for portraits (as the contemporary Sonnar-type Nikkor 2.5/105mm), I like short teles in the 100mm very much for landscapes as well. These days I usually use a 2.8/70-200mm zoom or either the Minolta AF 2,8/100mm Macro (which is excellent at infinity as well) or even the Minolta AF 2/100mm. Certainly a very small 2.5/100mm or 2.8/100mm such as the Minolta MD 2.5/100mm or the even smaller Topcor RE can be appealing for landscape photographers as well, even these days.


cbass wrote:

Most of us are not such one dimensional photographers. In the other thread compared to the Minolta MDIII 100 f/2.5 the bokeh was softer and lower contrast while the center at the same contrast and sharpness (very high). For some people that is a highly desirable trait in a portrait lens. For portraits this lens would be preferred over the Minolta by many.

Completely agree - the images shown by Oldhand are illustrating this perfectly.

cbass wrote:

As for sample variation. It has always existed and is present even in modern lenses. However, when you are looking at a lens from the 1960s - 1970s That's 50-60 years where it could have been serviced improperly or dropped or various other things may have happened. Once a lens gets that old you get what you get and there is a long time for previous owners to be the issue and not the factory.

Both lenses I've checked look pretty good - no obvious damage.
I have tested a dozen or so Minolta MD 1.7/50mm, MD 3.5/35-70mm and AF 4-4.5/28-135mm lenses as well ten Mamiya Sekor E 3.5/135mm teles and quite a few Konica AR zooms. It was obvious that the Minoltas (using 24 MP FF) had no visible sample variation, while both the Mamyia and the Konica Zooms were a prety mixed bag. This is just my observation, and not a scientific examination. I simply was sharing the information on the Topcor RE 2.8/10cm and 2.8/100mm lenses.

S


PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 1:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
In real life, any of these two lenses would fit , definitely. None of them should be comparable with modern high end lenses , specially designed for theirs sensor,like Sony 70-200 2.8 , neither in price or weight.
I wonder if the extreme corners could be affected by a different field curvature of these lenses , and that would imply a different learning curve of each lens? I mean, focusing on a different point could affect extreme corners ?


PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 4:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

Both lenses I've checked look pretty good - no obvious damage.
I have tested a dozen or so Minolta MD 1.7/50mm, MD 3.5/35-70mm and AF 4-4.5/28-135mm lenses as well ten Mamiya Sekor E 3.5/135mm teles and quite a few Konica AR zooms. It was obvious that the Minoltas (using 24 MP FF) had no visible sample variation, while both the Mamyia and the Konica Zooms were a prety mixed bag. This is just my observation, and not a scientific examination. I simply was sharing the information on the Topcor RE 2.8/10cm and 2.8/100mm lenses.

S


With the Minoltas perhaps it was luck, but I think it's more probable that Minolta's QC was exceptional. They were chosen by Leica as a collaboration partner. Leica has very high standards and would choose a facility that would be able to meet them. I doubt Leica would choose randomly.

As for Topcor I can't say how tight the QC was, however, they seemed to put a lot a precision into their lenses from the samples I have. I also two RE Auto Topcor 35mm f/2.8. One cm. One mm. I have two RE Auto Topcor 58 f/1.8. One cm. One mm. I have put up both against each other and they are pretty much identical. Of course, they aren't 100mm f/2.8 of which I have zero and perhaps the optical formula was revised at some point.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 6:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
stevemark wrote:

Both lenses I've checked look pretty good - no obvious damage.
I have tested a dozen or so Minolta MD 1.7/50mm, MD 3.5/35-70mm and AF 4-4.5/28-135mm lenses as well ten Mamiya Sekor E 3.5/135mm teles and quite a few Konica AR zooms. It was obvious that the Minoltas (using 24 MP FF) had no visible sample variation, while both the Mamyia and the Konica Zooms were a prety mixed bag. This is just my observation, and not a scientific examination. I simply was sharing the information on the Topcor RE 2.8/10cm and 2.8/100mm lenses.

S


With the Minoltas perhaps it was luck, but I think it's more probable that Minolta's QC was exceptional. They were chosen by Leica as a collaboration partner. Leica has very high standards and would choose a facility that would be able to meet them. I doubt Leica would choose randomly.

As for Topcor I can't say how tight the QC was, however, they seemed to put a lot a precision into their lenses from the samples I have. I also two RE Auto Topcor 35mm f/2.8. One cm. One mm. I have two RE Auto Topcor 58 f/1.8. One cm. One mm. I have put up both against each other and they are pretty much identical. Of course, they aren't 100mm f/2.8 of which I have zero and perhaps the optical formula was revised at some point.


I think it is hard to say anything about QC of these lenses because they’re so old. Who knows how many times they were diss- and reassembled and by whom.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 25, 2021 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
I have only ever used this lens for portraits.


Certainly a 100mm lens also is useful for images otherthan portraits. Yesterday I was in Zurich, to meet a friend. While on my way I took a few snapshots with Topcor RE 2.8/10cm mentioned above. These images are re-sized JPGs out of the 43 MP Sony A7RII full frame camera, no other PP applied. 100% crops at the end.


The Grossmünster, dating back to 1100-1117. In the foreground the Limmat river.
Topcor RE 2.8/10cm @ f2.8



Detail from the Fraumünster.
Topcor RE 2.8/10cm @ f2.8




Old part of the town.
Topcor RE 2.8/10cm @ f5.6




Detail - some arches along the Limmat river.
Topcor RE 2.8/10cm @ f2.8




Ancient buildings along the Limmat river.
Topcor RE 2.8/10cm @ f2.8




Preparing ouside places for christmas dinner - un-vaccinated people aren't allowed to dinner within the restaurants ...
Topcor RE 2.8/10cm @ f2.8
[/i]


PostPosted: Sat Dec 25, 2021 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yeah, I noticed that around 100mm feels quite natural as well in other than portrait settings.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2021 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1


PostPosted: Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Splitting hairs. Oddly, I don't have the Minolta; odd because it was my brand of choice for my first 36 years of photography. I do have the Topcor and am very happy with it. It's a lens that somehow impresses me just looking through it. I find the images equal to my preset Orestor unit doing pixel examination, and even then any difference doesn't matter. I consider them both to be very sharp lenses. Why I have five (or is it six?) 100mm lenses, I don't know but there is just one that is clearly sharper than the others; the Kalejnar 2.8/100. Maybe I have a lucky copy but it is evident every time I use it but the build quality stinks. My Vivitar S1 version of the Tokina 2.5/90 is another that screams sharpness. All of these lenses will perform equally in use.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
Splitting hairs. Oddly, I don't have the Minolta; odd because it was my brand of choice for my first 36 years of photography.

Get one - there are two different optical computations: the earlier [6/5], available as MC-I, MC-II and MC-X, and te later [5/5], available as MC-X, MD-I/-II/-III. The first computation is slightly inferior, broadly comparable with the Topcor RE 2.8/100mm (albeit not with the delicate "Sonnar" characteristics of the Topcor). The barrel if the MD-III is the best as it includes a built-in "double lens hood" with two small magnets holding it in position(not even Leica did this, let alone Nikon or Canon)

woodrim wrote:
I do have the Topcor and am very happy with it. It's a lens that somehow impresses me just looking through it.

The Topcor is more versatile than the MD-III 2.5/100mm - wide open and especially at shorter "portrait" distances it has the typical "Sonnar" look (rich in detail, relatively low contrast, and a slight "glow"), and for lansdscape it is perfect in the f5.6-f8 range.


woodrim wrote:
My Vivitar S1 version of the Tokina 2.5/90 is another that screams sharpness. All of these lenses will perform equally in use.

I don't know the Tokina, but the Tamron SP 2.5/90mm Macro is an excellent lens as well, for sure.

Last edited by stevemark on Thu Dec 30, 2021 2:12 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here are some 100% crops from my Zürich images published above. Taken with the Sony A7RII (43 MP FF).

AS USUAL PLEASE CLICK TWICE ON THE IMAGES TO GET THE FULL RESOLUTION!


100% crop from near the edges; f5.6, focus on the tiles in front (the belltower of the Grossmünster is slightly out of focus):



100% crop from near the edges; f5.6 (the belltower of the Fraumünster):



100% crop from the center, taken wide open (f2.Cool. Not much of the usual "Sonnar softness" is visible ...



100% crop from the center, taken wide open (f2.Cool as well. This crop is not from the corresponding f5.6 image shown above, but really taken at f2.8! Note that the background is slightly out of focus and therefore not as sharp as the lantern and the flag in the foreground.


S


PostPosted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice!


PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Adding pictures from my copy:





First picture I think is stopped down, but I don't remember.
Second picture is wide open.

Very nice colors and the out of focus background is lower contrast than the in-focus subject.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
All wide open, derived from RAW with minimal post processing.

tOPCOR10028DSC00209 by devoscasper, on Flickr

tOPCOR10028DSC00207 by devoscasper, on Flickr

tOPCOR10028DSC00206 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2