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

Topcor 58mm f/1.8
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 11:32 pm    Post subject: Topcor 58mm f/1.8 Reply with quote

Spotted one just now and was still trying to send a best offer. It was within a few minutes and it was gone. It is regarded as a top lens in terms of sharpness, contrast, and color rendition. But from the samples here or other places, the sharpness doesn't seem to be that high. Maybe I should really see the full file to appreciate it. Fellow 58mm/1.8 users, can you please share your experience? Thanks.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes it is a fine lens.
The combination of sharpness and bokeh is very pleasing.
Here are a couple to show that
Tom


#1


#2

#1


And a couple at f5.6

Note different focus points for each
#1


#2


PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just for comparison sake.
Here are two images shot wide open of the same subject by Zenitar-M 1.7/50 and Super-Takumar 1.8/55

Zenitar-M 1.7/50
#1


Super-Takumar 1.8/55
#1


PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the samples. The two at f/5.6 are really nice ones. I should have just BINed...


PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obviously there are different computations of the RE Topcor 1.8/58mm, and they seem to perform quite differently. We had an eralier thread about that. That said, all my three or four copies are the newes computation, and they are very good performers indeed - I would say they are the best normal lenses from the early 1960s i have.

Here's its performance on 24 MP FF:
http://artaphot.ch/topcon-re/re-auto-topcor-lenses/484-re-auto-topcor-58mm-f18

Stephan


PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 2:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry for the additional pp but I add very little if any sharpening to most of my images.







PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got the oldish optical version - it is not nearly as good as the new one. However, its mechanical and aesthetic qualities are great. For me, the 58/1.4 works way better.

w/o on a Canon crop, no pp


PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My (black) version of it: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums/72157633060044991


PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2018 3:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks all for your sample photos. I now have an even better feel of this lens.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Obviously there are different computations of the RE Topcor 1.8/58mm, and they seem to perform quite differently.

Stephan


Wasn't obvious to me.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My pics from the 129B https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/topcorre5818/

Not very obvious unless you see "The Topcon Story" book.
Seems to be at least 3 optical revisions and 5-6 different versions, 8 if you include the R Auto-Topcor and F Auto-Topcor
Code 62B based on the F Auto-Topcor from: 620001 to 625115 (1963)
Code 99B new optics,2nd and 3rd elements were separated. from 99xxxxx to 9901920 (1964)
Code 116B new mechanicals, from 1160001 to 11608302 (1965)
Code 129B (black or chrome) optics changed again From: 1161xxxx to 11670435 last known (1966) I have the chrome version, awesome lens.
Code 129BD (Navy) from: 1165xxxx to 11650401 last known (1967)
Code 129BG AUTO-TOPCOR (black) from: 1168xxxx to 11685922 last known (1971)


PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lightshow wrote:
My pics from the 129B https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/topcorre5818/

Not very obvious unless you see "The Topcon Story" book.
Seems to be at least 3 optical revisions and 5-6 different versions, 8 if you include the R Auto-Topcor and F Auto-Topcor
Code 62B based on the F Auto-Topcor from: 620001 to 625115 (1963)
Code 99B new optics,2nd and 3rd elements were separated. from 99xxxxx to 9901920 (1964)
Code 116B new mechanicals, from 1160001 to 11608302 (1965)
Code 129B (black or chrome) optics changed again From: 1161xxxx to 11670435 last known (1966) I have the chrome version, awesome lens.
Code 129BD (Navy) from: 1165xxxx to 11650401 last known (1967)
Code 129BG AUTO-TOPCOR (black) from: 1168xxxx to 11685922 last known (1971)


Thank you, that is interesting.
Mine has serial # 11608792 so seems to fall in no-man's land between 116B and 129B
Tom


PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's probably highest recorded serial, so probably a 116B
I don't know that anything Topcor is definitive, they seem to make changes mid run and some have a mix of attributes.
(Ignore the distance scale)
116B note the DOF scale has a chamfer and aperture ring has , that hang below the 1,8 2,8 the grip maybe different too.
http://blog.xuite.net/leon_photo/leon/348139514-Tokyo+Kogaku+Auto+RE-Topcor+5.8cm%2F1.8+%E9%96%8B%E7%AE%B1%E6%96%87


129B
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/6267576632/in/album-72157628579093559/


These have similar serial to the Navy lenses, and look like the 116B
http://jiafom.pixnet.net/blog/post/41450068-topcon-re.-auto-topcor-5.8cm-f1.8


PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
Lightshow wrote:
My pics from the 129B https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/topcorre5818/

Not very obvious unless you see "The Topcon Story" book.
Seems to be at least 3 optical revisions and 5-6 different versions, 8 if you include the R Auto-Topcor and F Auto-Topcor
Code 62B based on the F Auto-Topcor from: 620001 to 625115 (1963)
Code 99B new optics,2nd and 3rd elements were separated. from 99xxxxx to 9901920 (1964)
Code 116B new mechanicals, from 1160001 to 11608302 (1965)
Code 129B (black or chrome) optics changed again From: 1161xxxx to 11670435 last known (1966) I have the chrome version, awesome lens.
Code 129BD (Navy) from: 1165xxxx to 11650401 last known (1967)
Code 129BG AUTO-TOPCOR (black) from: 1168xxxx to 11685922 last known (1971)


Thank you, that is interesting.
Mine has serial # 11608792 so seems to fall in no-man's land between 116B and 129B
Tom


Indeed, mine as well. Serial 11670677 (chrome version), marked "RE.Auto-Topcor" and distance scale in feet only. Most probably Code 129B.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
Lightshow wrote:
My pics from the 129B https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/topcorre5818/

Not very obvious unless you see "The Topcon Story" book.
Seems to be at least 3 optical revisions and 5-6 different versions, 8 if you include the R Auto-Topcor and F Auto-Topcor
Code 62B based on the F Auto-Topcor from: 620001 to 625115 (1963)
Code 99B new optics,2nd and 3rd elements were separated. from 99xxxxx to 9901920 (1964)
Code 116B new mechanicals, from 1160001 to 11608302 (1965)
Code 129B (black or chrome) optics changed again From: 1161xxxx to 11670435 last known (1966) I have the chrome version, awesome lens.
Code 129BD (Navy) from: 1165xxxx to 11650401 last known (1967)
Code 129BG AUTO-TOPCOR (black) from: 1168xxxx to 11685922 last known (1971)


Thank you, that is interesting.
Mine has serial # 11608792 so seems to fall in no-man's land between 116B and 129B
Tom


Indeed, mine as well. Serial 11670677 (chrome version), marked "RE.Auto-Topcor" and distance scale in feet only. Most probably Code 129B.


Yes, mine has distance scale in feet only (including inches) and is marked 5.8cm on the bezel
Tom


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The first digits of the serial number are the "code" of the lens. Any 99B will have a serial number starting 99, and 116B will have a serial number starting 116, etc.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 3:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had two and sold one to a friend. Now I'll have to find out which model I sold him. I guess I never looked at the two together. The one I have here is serial number 9900727. f=5.8cm on front. The focus is silky smooth. Apertures from 1.8 to 22. Six blade diaphragm.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My 129B has feet & meters, it's more of an indicator what market it was sold in.

Yes, generally the serial will tell you the lens code, though there are exceptions, the 129 code lenses are all 116 serial.
Lenses with it's FL in cm tend to be the earlier lenses, my 129B is 58mm.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lightshow wrote:
My pics from the 129B https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/topcorre5818/

Not very obvious unless you see "The Topcon Story" book.
Seems to be at least 3 optical revisions and 5-6 different versions, 8 if you include the R Auto-Topcor and F Auto-Topcor
Code 62B based on the F Auto-Topcor from: 620001 to 625115 (1963)
Code 99B new optics,2nd and 3rd elements were separated. from 99xxxxx to 9901920 (1964)
Code 116B new mechanicals, from 1160001 to 11608302 (1965)
Code 129B (black or chrome) optics changed again From: 1161xxxx to 11670435 last known (1966) I have the chrome version, awesome lens.
Code 129BD (Navy) from: 1165xxxx to 11650401 last known (1967)
Code 129BG AUTO-TOPCOR (black) from: 1168xxxx to 11685922 last known (1971)


These serial numbers remind me of vivitar or soligor decoding. The Topcor water is too deep and I am a little
late for the boat...Smile


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kds315* wrote:
My (black) version of it: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums/72157633060044991
Klaus I went through your set and lo and behold a kitty photo! Amongst a plethora of fantastic flora photos. A lovely little white kitty. Yours?


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lightshow wrote:
My 129B has feet & meters, it's more of an indicator what market it was sold in.


That's right, my feet only model was mounted on a "Beseler" Topcon for the U.S. market.

Lightshow wrote:
Yes, generally the serial will tell you the lens code, though there are exceptions, the 129 code lenses are all 116 serial.
Lenses with it's FL in cm tend to be the earlier lenses, my 129B is 58mm.


Obviously mine must be one of the last produced as the serial is outside the known range of the 129B variant (11670677) and it's 58mm as well.
Luckily it's in a like new condition.

BTW, I have an earlier version as well (serial 11618977) with 5.8cm and meter/feet markings which had the stiff focus syndrome. Therefore I took it apart, but unfortunately I never managed to rebuilt it again. Wink


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Black with rubber ring mark 58mm, feet / meters (11680634, bought on eBay / Japan)
look by Сергей Пашнин, on Flickr funny little man by Сергей Пашнин, on Flickr


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some examples from my lens on Sony A7R II:

Against the light fully open:



With 10mm extension ring:



Landscape at F5.6:



The (dirty) lens (shot with F.Auto-Topcor 1:2.8 f=10cm):



It's certainly one of the better lenses from the 1960's. Wink


PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Has anyone ever observed any real difference in performance among the different versions?


PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodrim wrote:
Has anyone ever observed any real difference in performance among the different versions?


I have four RE 1.8/5.8cm and 1.8/58mm lenses, some black, some silver. All of them perform identically on 24MP FF, and all of them do have the "latest" optical construction. It seems that the older version never were officially imported to Switzerland.

In other words: I can't answer your question ...

Stephan