Images from my Topcon RE Super

[capitalq]

<p>Inspired by Subbarayan Prasanna's posts, I wanted to post some photos of some street life from my environs taken with an exquisitely made Topcon RE Super (also known as the Super D in the US). </p>

<p>For those who may not know, this camera was the first SLR which featured open aperture TTL metering way back in 1963. In a nifty piece of engineering, the meter cell is actually engraved in the reflex mirror (similar to some Mirandas). Had history unfolded differently, we might have held this camera in the same esteem as the Nikon F. It was a full system camera with interchangeable prisms and a battery powered winder (I understand that this was the US Navy's camera of choice). The build quality is superb -- easily equaling or surpassing the F (and most cameras that came after it). The angular style remains stylish and looks like it means business. In my opinion, this camera is more handsome and easier to use than the F. My only regret is that in my haste to purchase one of these I did not get the accompanying Topcor lenses. I have some after-market Spiratones and I don't think these do the RE Super proper justice. Looks like I'm still on the hunt...</p>

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

[capitalq]

<p>Here's a shot of the controls. Exudes quality and craftsmanship.</p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>The view from the viewfinder is bright and crisp...</p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>Here's are the streetscapes... </p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>One of my favourite streets in the City...</p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>An often overlooked architectural marvel of the City...</p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>And the last image...</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Great stuff, Capital. I've always felt there's a love/hate thing going on with the Topcon design; I'm firmly in the camp that likes clean edges and boxy construction, while others prefer the curvier appearance of, say, a Canon T90. The RE Super must be one of the "squarest" cameras ever built, and I suspect the military adopted it because it looks so damn'<em> purposeful</em>. Quite apart from it's other fine traits, of course. You're right in drawing parallels between the Topcons and Mirandas; they're both great marques that never really succeeded as they should have, both beautifully made system cameras that were leaders in design and innovation. Fine pics; Osgoode Hall is full of drama. Good luck with your hunt for the elusive Topcors!</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Yes, it certainly has a stout, tank-like quality to it. Neat urban life shots. </p>

[teos]

<p>Beautiful camera !</p>

[Mike Gammill]

Great shots. Topcon never offered the variety of lenses that Nikon did and was also new to the pro market so I think that

made competition difficult. But as others have said it's a real tank of a camera. Thanks for posting.

[Andy Collins]

<p>Cool shots, CQ. It is indeed a beautiful example of the Topcon, but I've never been a fan of the styling. Of course if I used it then I'm sure I'd be won over by its superb handling and engineering. For me though, the Nikon F with the standard prism is one of the all-time prettiest cameras ever along with the F2/standard prism and maybe the original Canon F-1. Not much else comes close in terms of styling in my book. This does <strong><em>not</em></strong> mean that I won't make every effort to acquire one of these Topcons, mind you. It would only be proper that I should fully and intimately experience such a fine piece of engineering!</p>

[alan_rockwood]

<p>"Is that a metered prism?"</p>

<p>Les, the meter is on the mirror.</p>

 

[subbarayan_prasanna]

<p>Beautiful perspectives on the Clinton and the Sicilian Cafe pictures. Spiratone produced some excellent quality lenses, at times better than the original branded lens of the camera maker. Topcon "inherited" a many design features as well as the market from the legendary Exaktas. Some Topcons could use Exakta lenses directly with the external aperture controls. On the market side, medical clinics round the world that were using Exakta systems switched easily and conveniently to Topcons, as the mounts were the same. It gave Topcon a ready-made market. All this was helped a lot by the business interests in the US that were anti-Ihagee [DDR], assisted liberally by the US courts and the Steenbergen heirs and the immature Ihagee West. [<em>They diminished the market for the Exaktas and even blocked out the name of the camera from DDR and gave it to Ihagee-West! Result, many Exakta VX 1000s were sold without a name and others sold as "Elbaflex". And then they closed down</em>.] Topcon was a company of much smaller resources than Nikon that was owned by the giant Mitsubishi empire. sp.</p>

[capitalq]

<p>Thanks everyone for looking and posting your comments.</p>

<p>Andy - Far be it for me to cast aspersions on the venerable F and its more than capable succesor the F2. These are both fine cameras which any serious SLR collector should have (esp. with prices these days). But in my research I kept coming across references to Tokyo Kogaku and the RE Super. Once my curiousity was piqued I realized that in some ways the Topcon design was superior and very advanced for its time. They were years ahead of Nikon and Canon and Minolta and Pentax when it came to full aperture metering. And although the needle in my cameras is a little too erratic for my taste, it still works (which is not something I can say about any of my F's photomic heads). Perhaps the best thing I like about the Topcon is the buttery smooth wind lever. And although the styling may be considered angular and harsh by some, the weight and heft and attention to detail gives this camera the feeling of a luxury item. By all means, you should add this to your collection if only to be able to say that you have the one camera that could have posed a threat to the F's supremacy in the 60s. </p>

[capitalq]

<p>Thanks, SP, for the very useful background.</p>

<p>Les - My understanding is that although the RE Super was a superior camera and recognized as such at the time, the US distributor (Beseler) was woefully inadequate when it came to marketing. Also, unlike Nikon, Topcon never offered the variety of lenses demanded by the pros. These two factors conspired to make Topcon an also-ran. By the late 70s, they were living off past glories and were never able to innovate and meet the changing consumer demands brought on by the OM-1 (more compact size) and the ushering of the CPU-age by the AE-1. I don't own a Canonflex with its R mount (yet) but I've never considered this a real system camera. And yes, I would love to order a strong coffee and some sicilian ice cream while visiting a temple....</p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>There are indeed a beautiful camera, and the build quality is all that you say it is.....better than the F....not game to comment there!<br>

Funny though, I have three of them, and each one has a ding on the top cover or prism. Maybe people did use them to hammer in nails!<br>

PS, you do need to get that 58mm 1.4 Topcor...it's lovely.</p>

[Andy Collins]

<p>Okay, I'm convinced. Not being very familiar with the camera, I didn't realize just how advanced it was in comparison to the other big names. Plus a buttery smooth film advance--if it's anything like the one on the Minolta XE-7, that's reason enough to own one. Off to the auction site again...</p>

[steve_levine]

<p>I'm not sure if it was a lack of lenses that held the Topcon back vs the Nikon F? Topcon had a solid line up from 20MM out to 500MM, which was considered adequate in the day. Not to mention interchangeable prisms, a motor drive, and tons of macro accessories. More likely it was failed marketing by Mr. Bessler.The US distributor of Topcon.</p>

<p>The US distributor for Nikon, Joe Ehrenreich convinced people that if you were a pro, than Nikon was your only choice.<br>

In reality , Topcon gear was every bit as good mechanically and optically. As a Topcon owner since the mid 1970's. I have seen a lot of very beat up Topcon gear , which says that some one was shooting them to death.<br>

<strong><br /></strong></p>

<p>The story goes that the US military bought Topcon Super D's, due to the name Bessler appearing atop the cameras. Apparently it was assumed that these were American made. Someone failed to realize that the name Topcon, was a contraction of "Tokyo Optical Co."</p>

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

[capitalq]

<p>Nice gear, Steve. I'm envious of all that glass.</p>

[alan_rockwood]

<p>From 1969 through about 1980 I owned an Exakta VX iia. Topcon was one of the cameras I wanted to own, partly because it used essentially the same lens mount as Exakta and partly because it was a top of the line camera. However, I could not afford such an expensive camera.</p>

[sexgun]

<p>I've read that this camera's adoption of the relatively narrow Exakta lens mount was a bad design choice, since that physical limitation prevented Topcon from ever developing a full lineup of (fast) lenses to compete with other companies. And that was a problem that no amount of marketing could have overcome.</p>

[capitalq]

<p>LMT - Not sure the Exakta lens mount hindered Topcon from producing capable lenses. My understanding is that the Topcors are fantastic lenses and quite fast and capable across their range (see Steve L's post above). </p>

[john_shriver]

<p>As a Topcon user and lover, I agree that the choice of lens mount was a mistake -- too narrow a throat. Look at the large size of the front element required on the 58/1.4 and 85/1.8 lenses. This would also prevent other fast lenses (28/2 and 35/1.8 were considered) from coming to market.<br>

It also causes vignetting in macro photography.<br>

But, Beseler's marketing policies, depending primarily on the "Fair Trade" laws (fixed retail pricing), were a primary problem. Nor was there the sort of professional support (repairs, loaners) that EPoI used to make Nikon a success.<br>

There was nothing wrong with the optical quality of the Topcor lenses. The aluminum-on-aluminum focusing helicals demand proper lubrication, where Nikon's brass-on-aluminum were more self-lubricating. Topcors were all aluminum to deal with the large amount of glass needed for the narrow throat, and to compensate for the rather heavy camera body. So Nikkor lenses were better able to handle professional "abuse".</p>