View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
asterinex
Joined: 04 Nov 2012 Posts: 311
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:29 am Post subject: Difference between RE and UV Topcon |
|
|
asterinex wrote:
I'm rather new to Topcon lenses. I have found a few on an online local secondhand market place.
There seem to be two kinds of topcon lenses. One with UV and others with RE.
The UV ones seem to be offered more frequent. What is the difference. Any optical quality differences ? Other Mount ?....
Wich ones are the ones to go after ? It must be adaptable to Fuji X-E1, Nex or M43. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The RE Topcors have the Exakta mount and are adaptable. The UV Topcors are completely different, they have a proprietary mount and fitted a range of leaf shutter SLRs. They have no aperture rings and no adapters are available. The UVs were budget lenses, not upto the superlative standard of the REs.
So in short, collect REs, ignore UVs. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asterinex
Joined: 04 Nov 2012 Posts: 311
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
asterinex wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
The RE Topcors have the Exakta mount and are adaptable. The UV Topcors are completely different, they have a proprietary mount and fitted a range of leaf shutter SLRs. They have no aperture rings and no adapters are available. The UVs were budget lenses, not upto the superlative standard of the REs.
So in short, collect REs, ignore UVs. |
Thank you for the very clear answer ! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7547 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
If you have NEX and have a set of these lenses, you may consider this adapter Click here to see on Ebay. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asterinex
Joined: 04 Nov 2012 Posts: 311
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
asterinex wrote:
Thx, but that is for the UV lensens, which are inferior. I'd rather go for the RE lenses. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16497 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
asterinex wrote: |
Thx, but that is for the UV lensens, which are inferior. I'd rather go for the RE lenses. |
Read your initial question, Calvin answered very properly and made a helpful comment about a rare adapter. _________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
cambug
Joined: 06 Jun 2010 Posts: 91
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cambug wrote:
Another (not so helpful ) solution is to get an UV to RE adapter ( made by Topcon and pretty rare ) and then stack with with Exakta to camera adapter. The trouble is, not so easy to find the UV to RE adapter, bought one years ago without knowing the use of it, until one day... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asterinex
Joined: 04 Nov 2012 Posts: 311
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
asterinex wrote:
cambug wrote: |
Another (not so helpful ) solution is to get an UV to RE adapter ( made by Topcon and pretty rare ) and then stack with with Exakta to camera adapter. The trouble is, not so easy to find the UV to RE adapter, bought one years ago without knowing the use of it, until one day... |
Thx fellows , I just bought 2 RE lenses8). See http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1339889.html#1339889 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
convert1
Joined: 05 Aug 2008 Posts: 100 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
convert1 wrote:
asterinex wrote:
Thx, but that is for the UV lensens, which are inferior. I'd rather go for the RE lenses.
After comparison UV Topcor 28mm f4 vs. Zeiss Distagon 28mm f2.8 , I doubt that image quality from UV Topcor lenses are inferior.
That's why I wonder if you can judge Image Quality without any comparison/seen between UV lenses and RE Topcor Lenses.
Best regards _________________ http://www.flickr.com/photos/convert1/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asterinex
Joined: 04 Nov 2012 Posts: 311
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
asterinex wrote:
convert1 wrote: |
asterinex wrote:
Thx, but that is for the UV lensens, which are inferior. I'd rather go for the RE lenses.
After comparison UV Topcor 28mm f4 vs. Zeiss Distagon 28mm f2.8 , I doubt that image quality from UV Topcor lenses are inferior.
That's why I wonder if you can judge Image Quality without any comparison/seen between UV lenses and RE Topcor Lenses.
Best regards |
No , I don't know.
I went further on the opinion of iangreenhalgh1 (2nd post in this thread). He said that the RE's are better.
I just believed him. Sorry |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rolf
Joined: 02 May 2009 Posts: 4123 Location: NRW/Germany
Expire: 2015-12-26
|
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rolf wrote:
I`m not sure that these lenses are budget lenses. I bought few of them with the respective cam. These lenses are really of very good make and styling.
Below few samples:
http://forum.mflenses.com/topcon-unirex-and-topcor-f4-28mm-t24624,highlight,%2Btopcon.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/topcor-uv-lenses-t23885,highlight,%2Btopcor.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/topcor-4-200-t20343,highlight,%2Btopcor.html
_________________ Rolf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57839 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-11-18
|
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Easy to you Rolf, you makes any lens to GOLD. Nice to see how a good photographer can save an orphan lens reputation _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
John Shriver
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 Posts: 192
|
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
John Shriver wrote:
The Camera:35 reviews of several UV Topcors showed a lot less line pairs per mm than the RE Auto-Topcors.
The UV lens designs had to work through the rather tiny (00 size?) leaf shutter in the matching cameras. Big compromise, biggest hit was lens speed. (The Exakta mount is already "too small", and the UV mount is worse in that respect.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cbass
Joined: 27 Jul 2019 Posts: 436
|
Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cbass wrote:
How much worse did the uv topcors test? Usually manufacturers make cuts in mechanics and build over glass. It’s all speculation but I would think the uv topcor glass should be good but prices low as they are difficult to adapt and therefore limited market. Even then this would be 1960s to 1970s budget which compared to modern lenses would be premium. The day a adapter becomes readily available I think the prices will rise. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014 Posts: 2913 Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
There have been threads by people on the UV lenses, and while not quite as good as the RE they are still quite good. Since adapter issues exist they can be purchased quite inexpensively. I personally don't have any (yet!). If I had an adapter I would not hesitate to try them. _________________ photos are moments frozen in time |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
cbass wrote: |
How much worse did the uv topcors test? Usually manufacturers make cuts in mechanics and build over glass. It’s all speculation but I would think the uv topcor glass should be good but prices low as they are difficult to adapt and therefore limited market. Even then this would be 1960s to 1970s budget which compared to modern lenses would be premium. The day a adapter becomes readily available I think the prices will rise. |
Some UV lenses are quite good. I've tested eg. both UV and RE versions of the 100 and 135 mm lenses here:
forum.mflenses.com/comparison-of-topcor-135mm-re-and-uv-lenses-t77370.html
forum.mflenses.com/uv-topcor-100mm-f4-on-aps-c-t72494.html
I would say that UV lenses are more than usable, particularly if their prices are part of the consideration. I've tested the 28, 35, 53, 100, 135 and 200 mm UV lenses. The links can be found in the 135 mm thread. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kpinkert
Joined: 15 Sep 2019 Posts: 3 Location: Maryland
|
Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 1:52 pm Post subject: UV to M42 adapter |
|
|
kpinkert wrote:
I have made several Topcor UV to M42 adapters that are made from the front portion of a UV Topcon camera lens mount. The only requirement that might be beyond most user's capabilities is the ability to do a little metal lathe work on the adapter parts. I took a stock "something smaller in diameter" to M42 adapter (~$6 on ebay) and turned down the inside a bit to fit the part that comes off of the camera. It works very well with a M42 Chinese helicoid mounted on my Nikon Z6. I simply super glue the stock M42 adapter onto the back of the aperture control ring I removed from the Topcon UV Camera. I could have used an epoxy, but with a snug fitting M42 to camera lens mount, the glue should be just fine. The cameras are very reasonably priced (like $20 or so including shipping). The piece from the camera unscrews from the front, so it comes off easily. You have a couple of options with the adapter. If you take the first two removable plates off of the lens mount on the camera and keep them together, you have the proper diameter opening and depth for any of the UV lenses. If you use just the first removable plate (has the aperture ring on it) only and glue the M42 adapter to that single plate, you will probably need to bore out the inside of the M42 adapter to allow the larger focal length UV lenses to slide past the inside diameter. The photos could be better, but here you go. Each one is a little bit different. The middle one needs to have the center of the M42 bored out to work with the 100mm f/4.
#1
#2
#3
_________________ Kevin J Pinkerton
Last edited by kpinkert on Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3461 Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 1:52 pm Post subject: Re: UV to M42 adapter |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
kpinkert wrote: |
I have made several Topcor UV to M42 adapters that are made from the front portion of a UV Topcon camera lens mount. The only requirement that might be beyond most user's capabilities is the ability to do a little metal lathe work on the adapter parts. I took a stock "something smaller in diameter" to M42 adapter (~$6 on ebay) and turned down the inside a bit to fit the part that comes off of the camera. It works very well with a M42 Chinese helicoid mounted on my Nikon Z6. I simply super glue the stock M42 adapter onto the back of the aperture control ring I removed from the Topcon UV Camera. I could have used an epoxy, but with a snug fitting M42 to camera lens mount, the glue should be just fine. The cameras are very reasonably priced (like $20 or so including shipping). The piece from the camera unscrews from the front, so it comes off easily. You have a couple of options with the adapter. If you take the first two removable plates off of the lens mount on the camera and keep them together, you have the proper diameter opening and depth for any of the UV lenses. If you use just the first removable plate (has the aperture ring on it) only and glue the M42 adapter to that single plate, you will probably need to bore out the inside of the M42 adapter to allow the larger focal length UV lenses to slide past the inside diameter. The photos could be better, but here you go. Each one is a little bit different. The middle one needs to have the center of the M42 bored out to work with the 100mm f/4.
#1
#2
#3
[/img] |
_________________ "I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
Honestly, I wish Topcon had skipped making the UV series and put that effort into a replacement mount for their Exakta based mount, I think they would have had an easier time designing lenses and would have been awesome, something like Minolta SR... Sigh.
Here's a nice post:
http://forum.mflenses.com/uv-topcor-35mm-f3-5-lens-t77352.html#1494650
TrueLoveOne wrote: |
Topcor UV adapter for NEX system:
UV Topcor lenses and NEX adapter by René Maly, on Flickr
I bought it from a guy who makes them at home, he's in the US. I found him through ebay. Can't find his link at the moment.....
Some samples from 3 UV Topcor lenses below, some more in my flickr gallery!
The 35mm is a very nice lens, surprised me a lot!
Snowwhite by René Maly, on Flickr
The 53mm f/2.0 wide open, unprocessed picture:
UV Topcor 2/53 by René Maly, on Flickr
And the 135mm f/4:
Run to you! by René Maly, on Flickr |
_________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kpinkert
Joined: 15 Sep 2019 Posts: 3 Location: Maryland
|
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:11 pm Post subject: Mirrorless lens adapter ideas |
|
|
kpinkert wrote:
When I had the older F/AI mount Nikon digital cameras, I was somewhat limited to what other brand/camera lenses where available because of the focal plane distances. Pentax 6x7 and Pentacon 6, Sonnar were some of the only options, unless I wanted to use an optical adapter (not!). When I got the Z mount Nikon 6 mirrorless, all of a sudden the wide world of just about every lens ever made became available. So I began to get a few adapters off of ebay that went from said lens make to Nikon Z. There are tons available. Then I became interested in the projector lenses (Colorplan, Schnieder, ISCO). These required a helicoid adaption of some sort. I jumped onto the M65, M52 and M42 helicoids in various ranges. What I love about the helicoids as compared to the "brand x to Nikon Z" adapters is that I get a macro/bellows function from the helicoid in addition to the normal lens focusing ranges.
With the helicoid, you still need some sort of lens to helicoid adapter. Fortunately, there are multiple options, one of them being the ability to purchase cheap reverse lens adapters for most camera lens brands and this will often give you an adapter that fits on the lens' bayonet that then allows you to screw in a lens filter. Or in my case, machine it a bit and stick on a M42/M52/M64 threaded adapter. There are other options as well. There is a great source of adapters made just for people who want to use all of these old lenses on their newer camera.
https://www.rafcamera.com/ _________________ Kevin J Pinkerton |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cbass
Joined: 27 Jul 2019 Posts: 436
|
Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2019 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
cbass wrote:
UV Topcor lenses are capable of very good performance, but unless you have a bunch of them already or are able to get a bunch of them cheap and want a collection I am not sure they are worth the effort. You either have to buy an adapter which go for around $60 from rare adapters or build one. The UV topcors are slower with longer MFD compared to the RE Auto Topcors. You can also pick up a descent amount of the RE Topcors for not that much money like the 58 1.8 and 135 3.5. The 35 is more expensive, but not terrible. So unless you want the 28 or 100 which you can get another brand lens in that focal length which is faster it doesn't make much sense. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|