Topcon R Topcor 200 f4 lens

[dennis_w3]

<p>I just purchased an R Topcor 200 mm f 4 lens on the e auction site, very clean in appearance and the description is equally good. While I wait for this to arrive next week, are there any users of this lens out there who could offer any insight into this lens? I'm a hopeless Topcon addict and have seen great results from my R Topcor 300 mm, but have no info on the 200. John Shriver?</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Yeah, I've got that lens, along with the RE. Auto-Topcor 200/5.6, and the RE Topcor 200/3.3.<br>

I ran some tests carefully focused on tripod with self-timer on Efke KB25. I've never scanned the film, but just looked again with the 8x loupe. There's a little more sharpness towards the corner in the R Topcor 200/4 at f/5.6 than on the RE. Auto Topcor 200/5.6 at f/5.6. The RE Topcor 200/3.3 (really a Cima Kogaku lens) is clearly inferior, but it is even faster.<br>

The 200/3.3 is also quite subject to internal haze, took a few samples to get a clean one.<br>

I was really testing to see if the 200/3.3 was "acceptable" for a particular low-light event, and it was acceptable, so I used it.<br>

The 200/5.6 was the "odd lens out" with bad measurement results in the old Camera:35 review of Topcor lenses.<br>

They really should have used the optical design of the 200/4 when they made an RE Auto-Topcor version, forcing themselves to use a 49mm filter size was a serious compromise for what came to be the 200/5.6.</p>

 

[john_shriver]

<p>Did some scanning.<br>

First three are the RE. Auto-Topcor 200/5.6 at f/5.6.</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Crop from center at full Nikon Coolscan IV resolution (2900 ppi at the film).</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Crop from right edge.</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Next three are R. Topcor 200/4 at f/4.</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Crop from center.</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Crop from right edge.</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Next three are R. Topcor 200/4 at f/5.6, so as to compare apples to apples.</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Crop from center.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>Crop from right edge.</p>

<div></div>

[john_shriver]

<p>None of these scans has been sharpened in any way.<br>

Not cut and dry in this comparison. The center may be a bit sharper on the 200/5.6 lens, but the edge clearly has problems. The 200/4 is a little soft at f/4, center and edge. But I'd say it bests the 200/5.6 at f/5.6.<br>

Of course, this isn't deep science. Ideally, you should repeat each shot several times, focusing each time, to be sure that you did hit optimum focus. But I did use some serious extra magnification when focusing.<br>

Some vignetting on both -- probably the fault of the narrow throat of the Exacta/Topcon lens mount. Having a throat that doesn't cover the full frame was a bad idea.</p>

[dennis_w3]

<p>John, thanks for the scans. The f4 seems a bit more contrasty, but o/w there isn't that much difference. I'm anxious to shoot the new lens, I'll try to post some results. I may even try to stack it up against the zoom Topcor, which I've always considered to be a reasonable performer, especially for having all the compromises inherent in zooms. </p>

[dennis_w3]

<p>The 200 arrived today, mint condition with the excellent butter-smooth focus and perfect mechanics and glass. Will try to shoot it this weekend.</p>