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

Helios 40-2 1.5/79 M42 79mm?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 5:13 pm    Post subject: Helios 40-2 1.5/79 M42 79mm? Reply with quote
Hello everyone,

I got an export version of a Helios 40-2 lens. I've owned several copies in the past and they all said 1.5/85, as of course because of the 1.5 aperture and the 85mm focal length.
However, yesterday I got one with the following text on it: 1.5/79.




Does anybody know what this means, why the lens has this 1.5/79 instead of 1.5/85 on it?


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting! May be the person who put the numbers on was drunk? Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Take this for what it is, a Silly Wild-Assed Guess.

The Helios is a clone of the Zeiss Biotar, one of the 'War Reparation' lenses that were given to the Soviets, like the Jupiters were Sonnars (mostly) and the Industars were Tessars.

Before the war Zeiss made Biotars in 75mm and 80mm lengths (among others). These were nominal focal lengths and as in any commercial lens made back then the actual focal length of any given lens could, and often did, vary somewhat from the nominal focal length.

Something I never thought about before. The Helios is a clone of the Biotar. The first year or so production would have been with Zeiss made parts, bodies, and glass. The Soviets would have gone into their own production, using original Zeiss machines (and operators) that were taken from Germany. If Zeiss Biotars were only made in 75mm and 80mm focal lengths, where did the 85mm Helios come from?

So here is my SWAG. The Helios is actually an 80mm lens v/s 85mm, and the actual focal length for this production run was 79mm. Either the importer or the laws of the importer's country, required that the lens be marked with its true focal length.

This is why it is called a Silly Wild-Assed guess.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
newst wrote:
Take this for what it is, a Silly Wild-Assed Guess.

The Helios is a clone of the Zeiss Biotar, one of the 'War Reparation' lenses that were given to the Soviets, like the Jupiters were Sonnars (mostly) and the Industars were Tessars.

Before the war Zeiss made Biotars in 75mm and 80mm lengths (among others). These were nominal focal lengths and as in any commercial lens made back then the actual focal length of any given lens could, and often did, vary somewhat from the nominal focal length.

Something I never thought about before. The Helios is a clone of the Biotar. The first year or so production would have been with Zeiss made parts, bodies, and glass. The Soviets would have gone into their own production, using original Zeiss machines (and operators) that were taken from Germany. If Zeiss Biotars were only made in 75mm and 80mm focal lengths, where did the 85mm Helios come from?

So here is my SWAG. The Helios is actually an 80mm lens v/s 85mm, and the actual focal length for this production run was 79mm. Either the importer or the laws of the importer's country, required that the lens be marked with its true focal length.

This is why it is called a Silly Wild-Assed guess.


Exact focal of Helios-40 is 85,18mm Smile


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
newst wrote:
Take this for what it is, a Silly Wild-Assed Guess.

The Helios is a clone of the Zeiss Biotar, one of the 'War Reparation' lenses that were given to the Soviets, like the Jupiters were Sonnars (mostly) and the Industars were Tessars.

Before the war Zeiss made Biotars in 75mm and 80mm lengths (among others). These were nominal focal lengths and as in any commercial lens made back then the actual focal length of any given lens could, and often did, vary somewhat from the nominal focal length.

Something I never thought about before. The Helios is a clone of the Biotar. The first year or so production would have been with Zeiss made parts, bodies, and glass. The Soviets would have gone into their own production, using original Zeiss machines (and operators) that were taken from Germany. If Zeiss Biotars were only made in 75mm and 80mm focal lengths, where did the 85mm Helios come from?

So here is my SWAG. The Helios is actually an 80mm lens v/s 85mm, and the actual focal length for this production run was 79mm. Either the importer or the laws of the importer's country, required that the lens be marked with its true focal length.

This is why it is called a Silly Wild-Assed guess.


That is a real sensible guess in my opinion.

However, would this not be noticed earlier by more people? I can not find anything about a 79mm or 1.5/79 text Helios 40-2 version on the internet.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I also think it's a mistake (saying because of alcool is maybe a bit too stereotypic Smile ), like we say, error is human. It would not be first time we see error. But I'm always surprise to see how such error can pass the controle check at the end of the production line.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is one test you could try. If you have other 85mm lenses you could compare the field of view between them and the 79mm. While I certainly can't deny the possibility of a mistake in engraving the name ring it is hard for me to picture this factory worker engraving 85mm on ring after ring for hours and then suddenly engraving 79mm, particularly as that number wouldn't have been used on any other lens ring so what could the worker be confusing it with? I would more likely believe deliberate sabotage than a mistake.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
All Helios 40 I've seen, both earlier than this and later, plus the modern reissue in Canon EF and Nikon F all say 8.5cm or 85mm, this is a first for me.

I'm wondering if it's a goof, f79 and #79xxxx
I also find it odd that there is no KMZ logo I thought it was only new lenses that didn't use the logo.

https://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/lenses/helios-40.html
Quote:
Focal length: 85 mm (85.18 mm )
Relative opening: 1: 1,5
Field of view: 28 °
Frame size: 24 × 36 mm

Number of lenses / groups: 6/4
Front vertex focal length: -26.85 mm
Rear vertex focal length: 44.52 mm
Distance from first to last surface: 81.53 mm
Light diameter of the first surface: ∅56.9 mm
Luminous diameter of the last surface: ∅36.8 mm

Resolution by TU (center / edge):
Helios-40 - 32/16 lines / mm
Helios-40-2 - 36/17 lines / mm
Distortion: ≈ 0.1%, barrel-shaped
Light transmittance:
Helios-40 - 0.75
Color formula: 10--0--4
Type of bleach:
old issues - chemical, single-layer 6)
release of 2012 - multi - layer 7)

Near Focus Limit:
Helios-40 - 1,15 m
Helios-40-2 - 1,15 m or 0,8 m
Limits of the diaphragm scale: 1: 1.5-1: 22
Number of diaphragm blades: 10

Connections:
lens with a camera:
Helios-40 - M39 × 1
Helios-40-2 - M42 × 1
for screw-in attachments:
Helios-40 - SpM66 × 0.75
Helios-40-2 - M67 × 0.75 (on the part of the lenses there is M66 × 0.75)
for hopeless attachments:
Helios-40 - ∅68 mm
Helios-40-2 - ∅ 70 mm
Arrangement of fastening for optical filters: front
Working segments: 45.2 mm (Helios-40), 45.5 mm (Helios-40-2), 46.5 mm (H), 44 mm (C)

Dimensions:
length of the lens Helios-40 with lids: 110 mm
length of the lens Helios-40-2 without covers: 95 mm
the largest diameter of the frame: 82 mm
Weight (passport):
Helios-40 - 1090 g
Helios-40-2 - 1185 g (other value was also indicated: 1.10 kg , as well as: 900 g and 950 g - without a tripod ring)
Helios-40-2 after 2012 - 850 g 9)

Year of development: 1950.
Calculation: D.S. Hair
Construction: n / a
Production: serial
Years of production (KMZ):
Helios-40 - since 1956. 10)
Helios-40-2 - from 1969-1970 (there is no exact data) to 1990, the production resumption - from August 2012. 11)
Helios-40-2-C 5) - from May 2013
Helios-40-2-N 5) - from May 2013








Last edited by Lightshow on Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:56 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lightshow wrote:
All Helios 40 I've seen, both earlier than this and later, plus the modern reissue in Canon EF and Nikon F all say 8.5cm or 85mm, this is a first for me.

I'm wondering if it's a goof, f79 and #79xxxx
I also find it odd that there is no KMZ logo I thought it was only new lenses that didn't use the logo.


That also crossed my mind. However, the size of the 1.5/79 print is different than that of the serial number.

Also, I guess the process of printing the serial numbers, text and 1.5/85 on the front of the ring would have been partially automated. It sounds logical that they only swap the serial number numbers during that printing process. So it must have been a joke or something like that. It would be very weird if they did it due to ''alcohol'', or it could be an drunk joke, or a human mistake.

About the logo, I do not know why it is not on it.
The ones I previously owned where all Russian versions with the logo on them.




newst wrote:
Here is one test you could try. If you have other 85mm lenses you could compare the field of view between them and the 79mm. While I certainly can't deny the possibility of a mistake in engraving the name ring it is hard for me to picture this factory worker engraving 85mm on ring after ring for hours and then suddenly engraving 79mm, particularly as that number wouldn't have been used on any other lens ring so what could the worker be confusing it with? I would more likely believe deliberate sabotage than a mistake.


Good idea. I have a Sony FE 85mm f/1.8, I will try it it out tomorrow.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The FE 85 might not be exactly 85mm. The Zeiss version is close to 83mm at infinity from patent information .


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
newst wrote:
While I certainly can't deny the possibility of a mistake in engraving the name ring it is hard for me to picture this factory worker engraving 85mm on ring after ring for hours and then suddenly engraving 79mm, particularly as that number wouldn't have been used on any other lens ring so what could the worker be confusing it with? I would more likely believe deliberate sabotage than a mistake.
Maybe someone making a pun at QC? In any case, the deliberate wrong numbering sounds the most plausible to me.

Or: Maybe some sort of prototype/test-version, marked differently to be easily recognisable?


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is my comparison. The Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 vs the Helios 40-2 1.5/79.




It seems that the Sony is wider than the Helios?!?!?


calvin83 wrote:
The FE 85 might not be exactly 85mm. The Zeiss version is close to 83mm at infinity from patent information .


That could very well be the case indeed. I tried a quick Google search, but I could not find any info about the Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 ''real'' focal length.

Assuming this is the case, the Sony has a ''real'' focal length less then 85mm, it then it is true that the Sony is in fact wider than the Helios. However, this means that the 1.5/79 on the Helios does not state the correct focal length, because it would be closer to 85mm, or above, instead of around 79mm, what is closer to the Carl Zeiss Biotar.

Thus, this makes me believe that this must have been a joke from a worker.


Sjak wrote:
Or: Maybe some sort of prototype/test-version, marked differently to be easily recognisable?


Sounds weird to me, but still could be the case. It does look like a normal Helios 40-2, can not spot any differences, besides the 1.5/79 on the front ring and the missing logo.


Does somebody knows something more about the fact the logo is missing?


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
newst wrote:
Here is one test you could try. If you have other 85mm lenses you could compare the field of view between them and the 79mm. While I certainly can't deny the possibility of a mistake in engraving the name ring it is hard for me to picture this factory worker engraving 85mm on ring after ring for hours and then suddenly engraving 79mm, particularly as that number wouldn't have been used on any other lens ring so what could the worker be confusing it with? I would more likely believe deliberate sabotage than a mistake.


Still, it happened, not only once.
I have several "non logical" name rings (including an Helios-40 with unusual SN). You have also for exemple this Jupiter-11 "11.5cm" (instead of 13.5mm)
http://www.imagebam.com/image/110d7e515743400
Fact that the KMZ logo is missing also can lead to the idea that this name ring was definitly badly made.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
BurstMox wrote:
Still, it happened, not only once.
I have several "non logical" name rings (including an Helios-40 with unusual SN). You have also for exemple this Jupiter-11 "11.5cm" (instead of 13.5mm)
http://www.imagebam.com/image/110d7e515743400
Fact that the KMZ logo is missing also can lead to the idea that this name ring was definitly badly made.


I tried looking for the production process of Helios lenses. Such as which machines they used or how the factory would look like from the inside.
Untill now I have only found this: https://assets.community.lomography.com/f0/fdcb879fd079ff3baf1e14256c1e0e2f77f133/1063x815x2.jpg?auth=be10778e89215ce7d1f0db1c5d0fba509d3b875f
It would be logical that it just was a human error or a joke. However, would they not have a preset ring where the numbers and logo where put in tight, and that you could only change the serial numbers?
Still, it would be the most plausible idea that they dropped the tool and everything fell out and they needed to replace it and they did it wrong. They did not throw away the faulty printed ring, but just put it on the lens anyway. Correcting the mistake after they printed the faulty text and saw it.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Helios 40-2 1.5/79 M42 79mm? Reply with quote
HackingDutchman wrote:
Hello everyone,


Does anybody know what this means, why the lens has this 1.5/79 instead of 1.5/85 on it?


The scribe had the serial number in mind, and the reject name ring found it's way back on to a lens?


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
HackingDutchman wrote:


I tried looking for the production process of Helios lenses. Such as which machines they used or how the factory would look like from the inside.
Untill now I have only found this: https://assets.community.lomography.com/f0/fdcb879fd079ff3baf1e14256c1e0e2f77f133/1063x815x2.jpg?auth=be10778e89215ce7d1f0db1c5d0fba509d3b875f
It would be logical that it just was a human error or a joke. However, would they not have a preset ring where the numbers and logo where put in tight, and that you could only change the serial numbers?
Still, it would be the most plausible idea that they dropped the tool and everything fell out and they needed to replace it and they did it wrong. They did not throw away the faulty printed ring, but just put it on the lens anyway. Correcting the mistake after they printed the faulty text and saw it.


You can find photos here (scroll down a bit) : http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/photos/views.html
or here : https://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/history/princelle-about-kmz-horizons-eng.html


PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sciolist wrote:
The scribe had the serial number in mind, and the reject name ring found it's way back on to a lens?


Yup, I think that is very possible.

BurstMox wrote:
You can find photos here (scroll down a bit) : http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/photos/views.html
or here : https://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/history/princelle-about-kmz-horizons-eng.html


Wow, really nice to see. Thank you!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1