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

The Topcon RE Auto Topcor 1.4 58mm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 11:43 am    Post subject: The Topcon RE Auto Topcor 1.4 58mm Reply with quote
Finally, I sat down to write this review. First, let me clear something out, that this is not actually a review, this is a praise to my favourite lens. Well, let me get down to the details and show you some photos. First, a shot of my secret lover in front of my Bessaflex.

Now thats enough of digital for one day.
Its a Topcon RE lens. I ordered to DIY RE to M42 kit from ebay. Its just screwing and replacing the mounts. All of the next photos were take with my Bessaflex. All of them are 100% without any post production. Different films, developed, scanned and downsized (a little cropping on some). As some know already, I dont like PP, makes you a lazy shooter in my opinion. Enough of the chit chat. Let me first throw you some examples. Most are 2.8.
Here we go...





This is so far my favourite picture with the lens. Im not 100% sure, but I think it was wide open




1.4, my shoe.




2.8, Rossmann I believe, 1€ film, 400.




She was a little shy. 2.8 again. Ilford BW 100.




1.4 now. A friend looking at this prints.




I think this was 5.6.




2.8 again.





Went to shoot some birds, there was so much light and I had 400 film in the camera. Aperture was 8 if I remember correctly. Reminds me of Hitchcock.




From the same spot as the last one. There were alot of them...




I think this was 5.6




Just walking around Tallinn. 2.8




Still walking. 2.8




Again my girl. Im not sure about the aperture, but its the Ilford 100.





Enough of everyday shots. Now for a little more scientific stuff. A little dof and bokeh test.
It goes 1.4->2.8->5.6->8






Now a treat for you guys. I read about the lens about half a year ago, and it sayd that this lens has very little diffraction problems. So, I tested it.
The next one is with f16, in a studio, with flashes. Superia 400 was used.
And the model is me.


The conclusion:
Why do I think this is the best lens (for me).
1. Its SHARP. 58 1.4 is ALOT narrower than a 50mm, but when stopped down a little, its quite easy to get it in focus.
2. The bokeh is exactly what I want.
3. The build quality is insane. It focuses sooooo smooth, like butter.
4. Its 58mm and closest focus is 0.45m
5. Its 58mm. This means when I screw it on my Bessaflex, I can walk around both eyes open, because it does not magnify "reality". I find this very handy when focusing in very bad light conditions.

The only negative so far, is the size. But thats nothing.





Me, my favourite lens and my favourite camera say bye for now.


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I kinda like it, not very familiar with the competition though (Takumar, Rolleinar, Nikkor, Rikenon, etc.) but it works for a fast lens. DOF is not very rough which in such high apertures should matter.


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Good to see a young guy passionate about a manual focus lens.
Nice selection of photos, I like the first portrait and the Tallinn winter landscapes.


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Beautiful selection. Nice ellipse bokeh at the edges of first portrait. Great pop-up effect with seagulls. Did that kiddo wear anti-radiation suit perhaps Wink?


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks guys.

I also tried a Super-Takumar 50 1.4, Auto-Revuenon 55 1.4.
I tried all of them at 1.4 and compared the histograms.

Topcon was the brightest and had the more mid-tones. Revuenon had more shadow detail. Takumar was lagging behind, probably because my example is yellowed a bit.
Something to do with overall contrast. Interesting.

Topcon was the sharpest, theres no doubt.


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A young guy using not only MF lens, but film? I think the last time I used film was maybe shortly after you were born. If I may differ with you, I don't believe post processing is lazy, it takes time and skill and is part of the photographic process, just like darkroom work was. Besides, the printing of your negatives required adjustments as well.

The lens appears to have very good sharpness wide open. I really think I might better appreciate the lens from digital pictures. The old doorway shot is wonderful - I tend to like pictures/subjects like that.

Other observations... As for secret lovers, I like lenses, but prefer women. The message in the dumpster and Audi picture seems grammatically incorrect. The sunglasses shot is playful and fun - good catch. And lastly, your girlfriend is better looking than you Wink


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The more you use pp, the more you will forgive yourself while shooting.
Thats what happened to me, and thats what I see all around.

Someone wants the mother, someone wants the daughter.
I prefer film to digital 99 % of time.

Lastly, it would be strange if you would like me more than my girlfriend.


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
I don't believe post processing is lazy, it takes time and skill and is part of the photographic process, just like darkroom work was.

This is a matter that always has divided my opinion. Personally I prefer to only adjust the exposure and maybe crop but modern pro-level photography goes way beyound that so if the guys who "know about photography" do it, why should anyone feel bad about doing so?

woodrim wrote:

And lastly, your girlfriend is better looking than you.

Amen! Very Happy


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Its just your personal preference.

Just like the color of your underwear... Some like white, some with hearts....

Some feel the need of pp, some like pp, some try to manage without and so on...


PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Definetly, and I respect your photography just for the sheer fact that you still have the guts to shoot analogue, I wouldn't be able to afford that to begin with but I also like the flexibility of digital bodies anyway.


PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
dude that shot with the birds rushing in & out of the frame blew me mind!
Good stuff! Quite like it!


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
"The future is analogue. "

. . .which is why we are viewing digital versions of your submissions in a digital forum over digital devices around the world. If you really believe the future is analogue you should demonstrate your commitment by spreading the word via letterpress printing and gravure reproductions.

Nice looking lens though.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's a fine lens - I had one on a Topcon RE Super forty years ago . . . which was also a fine camera. Mine was a silver one but it looks like yours is the later black finished version from the Super D (I think!). I believe the two were optically identical.

Do you have the camera to go with it?


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hemisferico wrote:
"The future is analogue. "

. . .which is why we are viewing digital versions of your submissions in a digital forum over digital devices around the world. If you really believe the future is analogue you should demonstrate your commitment by spreading the word via letterpress printing and gravure reproductions.

Nice looking lens though.

Its based on the theory that the III world war will destroy most of the infrastructures out there. No electricity grids, no world wide web. And thats when only analogue photography will be possible. Thats what it means.

Im thinking more and more not to post anything on this forum.
People are just so ... superficially mean.

scsambrook wrote:
It's a fine lens - I had one on a Topcon RE Super forty years ago . . . which was also a fine camera. Mine was a silver one but it looks like yours is the later black finished version from the Super D (I think!). I believe the two were optically identical.

Do you have the camera to go with it?


Yup. I do.
It came with the D-1, a real tank !

The Bessaflex is based on the Topcon D series.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Im thinking more and more not to post anything on this forum.
People are just so ... superficially mean.


Eh, just ignore it. A truly uncalled for, sarcastic comment. It would be a damn shame to lose you and your commitment to film.

You have a great way of capturing the atmosphere of the scenes. I don't know quite what it is but I think the exposure matches the surroundings very well. Colors even seem raw, natural, and film-like. I appreciate them untouched.

I would only say the B&W ones could do with a bit more contrast. If I were to print them in the darkroom i would do this. Don't think it hurts the integrity of the original negative.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
themoleman342 wrote:

I would only say the B&W ones could do with a bit more contrast. If I were to print them in the darkroom i would do this. Don't think it hurts the integrity of the original negative.

Yeah. Exactly. They were hand developed. And it seems little miscalculated. Now that roll means more to me than a machine developed film, they have a better story to tell me. Smile
If you know what I mean.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
great series Joosep!
the lack of grain is impressive
the b&w low grade contrast is ok for me


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Joosep wrote:
hemisferico wrote:
"The future is analogue. "

. . .which is why we are viewing digital versions of your submissions in a digital forum over digital devices around the world. If you really believe the future is analogue you should demonstrate your commitment by spreading the word via letterpress printing and gravure reproductions.

Nice looking lens though.

Its based on the theory that the III world war will destroy most of the infrastructures out there. No electricity grids, no world wide web. And thats when only analogue photography will be possible. Thats what it means.

Im thinking more and more not to post anything on this forum.
People are just so ... superficially mean.


Joosep: I don't think anyone has been mean. I think hemisferico was just tugging on your chain. Myself, I was offering an opposing view, that's all. Wasn't saying you're wrong since only you can know your preference; I was offering my thoughts as a counter argument. No need to be defensive when someone offers differing viewpoints or criticism, and no need to defend yourself. Debates can be enjoyable and things can be learned or better appreciated when you see them as sharing of ideas and not personal attacks.

Now with that understood, I'd like to offer some further thoughts. Whether you do enhancements in the darkroom or in Photoshop, it's still enhancing the original exposure, although PS is much more powerful. I try to look at photography as an art form, and in doing so will apply artistic modifications to my photographs. Professionals always did this in the darkroom in the film days. I don't know that there were any pros that didn't realize the limitations of film and the need to compensate. Digital has limitations today, but how much of those we live with is determined by how well we understand them and compensate, whether at the time of exposure of afterwards. To me, the objective is to put out my best and not settle for flaws that are easily corrected. Again, it's art, and I'll apply the brush to the best of my abilities, limited as they are, to achieve the best possible image. I'll define the photographer/artist as a multi-talented individual that sees not just the image, but the potential of the image as well. You seem to be more the technician that wants to challenge yourself technically without benefit of aids. So I suppose the challenge is what it is about with you, and not so much the end result.

Oh, and before I forget, after the next world war by your definition we will have no electricity to manufacture film, operate a darkroom, and quite probably have no time for photography anyway as all efforts will go toward survival. Our time will be spent 100% in search of food, warmth, and sex, just like in the old days.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
1) Art is not about getting the best result. You got it all wrong.
You should really get a book on modern art.

2) Counter argument ? So my argument was my preference ? Nice..

3) This is my lens review topic. Your turning it into another thing.

Thank you for understanding.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Joosep wrote:
1) Art is not about getting the best result. You got it all wrong.
You should really get a book on modern art.


Sure, because books are absolute truths and as such they should be praised in a dogmatic way.

I don't understand why you take criticism so badly. But like you said, let's cut the offtopic.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ChromaticAberration wrote:
Joosep wrote:
1) Art is not about getting the best result. You got it all wrong.
You should really get a book on modern art.


Sure, because books are absolute truths and as such they should be praised in a dogmatic way.

I don't understand why you take criticism so badly. But like you said, let's cut the offtopic.

First you see that there is too much offtopic. Then you post. And then you say cut the offtopic ?

I pointed out that after reading a book Mr. Woodrim would then realize, that art is not goal based, there for it is not about getting the "best result". I sayd modern art, because that would be where it is most visible.
Nothing to do with dogmas. Nothing to do with one certain book.

Anyway. My topic is now gone.
Pleasure to see another part of humanity.

Joosep out.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice lens, Joosep. Thanks for sharing.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
These days, the philosophy of art and the long-term future of analogue imaging interests me less than playing with gear and taking pictures for fun today. But that might be because having had pretty much all of my notional "three-score-years-and-ten" my own future is possibly relatively short term Very Happy

But for now, Joosep - have you tried the lens with colour reversal film? If not, then you'll have another pleasant experience to come.

Keep taking the pictures and enjoying your hobby.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The quality of this lens is well demonstrated in this series, so well done. Film? Imagine.

The lens usually sells for more than $300, and shows up fairly regularly on the bay. There is a copy made by Cosina under the Voigtlander name (yes the same as the apo series). I believe it is still available with Nikon and Pentax mounts. A friend of mine has one and it is probably his best lens including a couple of the modern nikkors.



patrickh


PostPosted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 7:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
your series really shows some amazing performance from this lens. very well done!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2