maddalice Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 Hi, sick of staying indoors so taking my camera for a walk and trying out a Helios-44M-4 2/58 lens. Any thoughts on the lens' performance? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochen_S Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 If you like sharp wide open: "poor". Mine came in 39mm mount, so I put it on an enlarger and didn't like what I saw. If you like a dreamy, flattering portrait lens: Try it out. YouTube seems full of folks ravishing about it for that purpose. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodeo_joe1 Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 (edited) Depends which day of the week your lens was made. Or whether its assembler had borscht for dinner the previous day. Those lenses can range from excellent to Aaaargh! I have 3 of them in 39mm LTM. 2 of them are pretty good, even wide open, while the third one is only fit for a paperweight or Lomography. The one I have in 42mm Praktica/Pentax mount is somewhere in the middle. I've seen better, and I've seen a lot worse. However, I'm surprised your Contax didn't spit the Helios out of its mount in disgust. Edited March 23, 2020 by rodeo_joe|1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddalice Posted March 23, 2020 Author Share Posted March 23, 2020 Depends which day of the week your lens was made. Or whether its assembler had borscht for dinner the previous day. Those lenses can range from excellent to Aaaargh! I have 3 of them in 39mm LTM. 2 of them are pretty good, even wide open, while the third one is only fit for a paperweight or Lomography. However, I'm surprised your Contax didn't spit the Helios out of its mount in disgust. Haha. And to think I normally use my Zeiss Planar T(!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Farrell Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 My first SLR had this, in M39 mount - I had no complaints about its performance. I currently have a number of them, and use them occasionally with one of the Zenits. They tend to be lower contrast than similar Japanese lenses, but still quite usable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m42dave Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 (edited) I have the MC Helios 44M and 44-3 (both in M42 mount) and MC 77K-4 (Pentax K-mount). Previously I had the MC 44M-7, MC 44K-4, and have tried several other versions as well. All of my copies have been fine performers that can give some much more expensive lenses a run for the money. There are anecdotes about sample variability, but that has not been my experience. The Zenitar lenses I have (ME-1 50/1.7, K2 50/2) are also excellent. The slightly longer focal length of 58mm is nice for portraits, perhaps less useful for landscapes. Some like the "swirly" bokeh at wider apertures, some may find it distracting, but I think it depends more on the subject matter. Edited March 23, 2020 by m42dave 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_drawbridge Posted March 23, 2020 Share Posted March 23, 2020 Sharp, but kind of harsh, the B&W results always remind me of documentary photographs from the Cold War era. Which is probably not surprising. The renowned "swirly bokeh" is not really to my taste, either, but it can be used to good effect. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m42dave Posted March 24, 2020 Share Posted March 24, 2020 Almost forgot about the Helios-81 (Kiev/Nikon and Kiev 10/15 mounts) and Helios-103 (Kiev/Contax). Also fine lenses. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck_foreman1 Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 Like the others I have a few different mounts.. Had to laugh too, when you replied "Haha. And to think I normally use my Zeiss Planar T(!)" IIRC this early design Planar spawned the Biotar , Helios and is the progenitor dbl Gaussian design.. I am for the most part a fan. The Kiev mount version Helios is very nice all around. The M42 displayed this deamy bokeh at least in the situation I shot. . The Zeiss Pancolar and the later model Planar are excellent all around. Has someone mentioned they do good in shooting people or things. It can still work for a basic landscape, but it excels closer in. While The Tessar/Skopar ruled the market through the immediate post war period, the standard kit lens by the mid 70s was a dbl Gaussian 50mm typically 1.7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendunton Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 I quite like mine, no problem with sharpness, pleasant bokeh Helios 44-2, Sony Nex 6 by Ken Dunton, on Flickr 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 This Helios lens is the Soviet version of the Zeiss Biotar Double-Gauss lens. I have multiple copies of both the original Zeiss and the Soviet copy. Perhaps, I've just been lucky, but all of them except the one with massive front lens scratches have been excellent. Here was Herbert Keppler's comparison of the original Biotar and the then (2007) contemporary Nikon equivalent Modern Photography 2007-04 There's a lot of "received knowledge" out there that is not worth much. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck_foreman1 Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 Thanks for posting this JD . AS noted this is subjective but the similarity is unmistakable. It is a sound design apparently comes to life with modern coating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now