Hi Matic E

[nikkortorokkor]

Merry Christmas all.

Here's the newest addition:



Someone obviously cherished it, it even came with working batteries.

Not sure what I'll do when they run out.

Maybe this is Minolta's most frustrating rangefinder: It is very nicely made, handles nicely and is quiet beyond belief. However, No manual mode & MUST have batteries (2 RM640 Mercury cells) to operate. There is no aperture diaphragm as such, instead the shutter blades control both speed and arperture.

sure is pretty though, and what a great lens.

[scott]

Michael,
You might try 3 SR44 or LR44 batteries. Works fine for me with my Hi-Matic E and Hi-Matic F.

[nikonbob]

Micheal

You are right about the frustrating part and also about the lens. I think you will find that it is a real cracker, at least mine is. I can't remember what I used as a substitute battery in mine. Nice find.

Bob

[nikkortorokkor]

Thanks, Scott.
I was a little worried, since I read that the E doesn't like to be fed on alkalines, they'll light up the circuit, but won't fire the shutter. After reading your post I checked and found a local supplier who has LR44 silver oxides 'specially for electronic shutters'. Sounds like the deal.

Bob, I think I'll get a film in it today and check out that lens.

[nikonbob]

Micheal

Just curious, did you ever shoot that roll of film in the Highmatic?

Bob

[nikkortorokkor]

Bob, there is a film in there now.

I've been away tramping (hiking for you non-kiwis) and decided the the E was just too purty to risk out in the bush. Instead I took my bush and beach standby, the Himatic AF2. So now I have 2 rolls on the go.

So far, the most remarkable thing about the E is its weird sounding but very quiet shutter. It as the same cick-buzz as the AF2, but much quieter. I guess the strange sound is due to the electronic Seiko ESF shutter, the silence would make a Leica user green

Speaking of which, the build quality of the E really impresses me. It almost makes me believe the rumor that it was the E which convinced Leitz that Minolta were up to the job f producing the CL, though when one thinks about it, the SRT 101 would've been proof enough. Maybe not much finesse, but plenty f quality.

BTW, I pulled the batteries out of the E and they're plain old alkalines, so I guess the story that the E won't even fire on Alkalines is just more internet scuttlebut.

[nikonbob]

Micheal

I wonder if the 40/1.7 has the same optical layout as the 40/2 for the Minolta CL?

Bob

[nikkortorokkor]

Bob,

Now we're starting to get into Leica-land, home of fragile egos and maniacal screw counters - or maybe just people who know what they're on about - so I'll tread carefully and claim absolute ignorance about all things Leitz. But,

Jan-willem Hubbers, who has a Minolta Users Group www.sds.com/mug/
has this to say:

'Some have suggested that the 40mm f1.7 employed by the E was the basis for the 40mm f2.0 Rokkor (aka the 40mm f2.0 Summicron-C) that Minolta built for use with the Leica CL. This seems unlikely. The design clearly predates the Leitz-Minolta partnership, but is known that Leitz originally intended to market the CL with a 40 mm f 2.8 lens and that Minolta proposed an f2.0 design. The f2.0 lens was deemed adequate in performance to bear the Leica name and was also considered more attractive the the upscale amatuer market for which the CL was intended.'

I do know that Jan Willem is a little off in that the 40mm 2.0 Summicron C was made in Germany, even if it was as he's suggested, a Minolta design.

My E carries the ROKKOR - QF legend, meaning it is a 4 group, 6 element lens.

The venerable old Hi-Matic 7 had an f1.8/45mm ROKKOR PF: a 5 group, 6 element lens.

A bit of digging finds that the M ROKKOR f2.0/40mm also had 6 elements in 4 groups, and that the 1st 6,000 or so units produced by Minolta did, indeed, carry the QF designation.

So, it seems clear that the 40/2.0 M ROKKOR was not new territory for Minolta when they pitched the idea of a fast 40 to Leitz. They'd already had such a lens: the 40/1.7 ROKKOR - QF fitted permenantly to the E.

[PeterW]

Hi Michael, you wrote:

BTW, I pulled the batteries out of the E and they're plain old alkalines, so I guess the story that the E won't even fire on Alkalines is just more internet scuttlebut.

Absolutely right. I'm very far from being an electronics expert - indeed I rank fairly high as an electronics non-expert. So when mercury cells became difficult to get I had a chat with an acquaintance who IS an electronics buff and asked him what would happen if I used an alkaline or some other type of cell.

He's one of those people that like to give an hour's lecture in answer to a simple question, so I asked him to keep the answers short and as simple as possible so I could understand it.

I've just turned up my notes, and this is basically what he told me.

Q. will a camera system made to use mercury cells function properly on other types of cells?
A. Of course it will if the voltage is near enough right. The circuit doesn't know what type of cell is powering it, it only knows what the voltage is.

Q. What was the advantage of a mercury cell compared with a cheap alkaline cell?
A. It gave a very even voltage over 90% of its life whereas an alkaline cell falls of gradually all the time it's being used.

Q. Will the system still be accurate with other types of cells and voltages?
A. Only if the circuit is a Wheatstone Bridge type which balances different voltages (he wanted to take this further, but I stopped him by saying that more facts on this would only confuse me).

Q. What difference will a small change in voltage make?
A. It will make the circuit over or underestimate the correct exposure.

Q. Can the circuit be modified fairly easily to accept a different voltage?
A. Yes, it usually can, but there's no point adjusting it from 1.36v of a mercury cell to a nominal 1.5 volts of an alkaline because the alkaline doesn't stay contant at 1.5 volts.

Q. What's the best type of cell to use if you're going to have the camera cicuit adjusted?
A. Probably silver oxide. Very flat constant voltage curve but it's 1.6 to 1.62 volts compared with 1.3 to 1.36 of a mercury cell.

Q. Will 1.62 volts damage a circuit made to work on 1.36 volts?
A. (Pause). I wouldn't think so. It would have to be a very delicate circuit for an extra 0.3 volts to damage it.

Q. What difference will the extra 0.3 volts make to the exposure?
A. Difficult to say accurately. Depends on the type of circuit, but I'd guess at about 1.5 to 2 stops. Try it and see.

Q. What about zinc-air cells?
A. Very similar to mercury cells in voltage and discharge curve, but a short life once you break the seal. They're also hygroscopic, they take in and give up moisture, so if you take the camera out in a moist atmosphere the cell will take in moisture. When you bring it back in the warm and dry it will give up the moisture so you may find the contacts corrode more quickly.

Q. Last question: Does all this apply to auto exposure systems as well as systems with a meter?
A. Oh my! Yes, probably. There are lots of variations of AE circuits, but most, as far as I know, work on the time it takes to charge up a very close tolerance capacitor. You open the shutter and it closes when the capacitor's fully charged - that's a VERY simplified explanation.

So there you have it, the (very) distilled wisdom from a BSc in electronics. I have no idea if he was right or wrong, but I'd guess probably right. Take it for what you think it's worth.

PeterW

[nikkortorokkor]

Peter,

electronics is a scam made up by tricksters (electricians) to keep the rest of us in the dark (pun intended) about the real source of 'electrical' energy: smoke.

Aside from that, your friend's advice sounds sage.

As one camera shop employee told me: 'the shutter is probably already out more stops due to age than will be caused by the change in voltage'.

In the case of my older Hi Matic 7 it is the mechanical AE link from the meter to the diaphragm that causes me problems. I find they meter accurately as metered manuals, but overexpose on AE, even after a clean. It'll be interesting to see how the much more electronic (thanks to Yashica) Hi-Matic E handles the change in batteries. I think it'l be well within the latitude of modern, consumer grade 200 print film.

[PeterW]

In the case of my older Hi Matic 7 it is the mechanical AE link from the meter to the diaphragm that causes me problems.

I've never had a lot of confidence in the mechanical 'trapped needle' AE system. It uses the first pressure on the shutter button to set the aperture mechanically. To my mind it's delicate with too much chance of friction and sticktion. I found I got the best results (but not always consistent) when I made a distinct pause after the first pressure to allow time for the diaphragm to decide where it should be. I know an open-aperture-metering auto-diaphragm-lens system works in a similar way, but they seem to give fewer problems provided the diaphragm itself isn't sticky, maybe because the tripping trigger is more robust, and you set the diaphragm stop manually.

PeterW

[nikkortorokkor]

peterw said:

I've never had a lot of confidence in the mechanical 'trapped needle' AE system. It uses the first pressure on the shutter button to set the aperture mechanically. To my mind it's delicate with too much chance of friction and sticktion.

from my very limted experience, I agree.

Which brings us back to the Hi Matic E, which does away with the diaphragm altogeter and relies on the shutter for both aperture and speed.

I suppose Minolta purchased this 'Electronic Control' system from Yashica; the E carries the little Yashica attom logo anyway. I wonder if they did so because of te exact problems Peter describes with their own trapped needle Hi-Matics ? I certainy haven't bothered to run a film through my original Hi-Matic, which, like the E is AE only, but using a trapped needle and Selenium cell. after 45 odd years thats a few too many cards stacked up against accurate exposure!