Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Helios-44 58mm f2 (Initial version)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 7:34 pm    Post subject: Helios-44 58mm f2 (Initial version) Reply with quote

I always hear that Helios-44 is not a good lens (people uses crap/junk all type of word for this lens). What I have read, 44-2 and later versions are good.
Mine is not preset, just Helios-44 58mm f2, M42 mount.
I took the lens out to test.
To me, its sharp enough.. much above "junk" status Twisted Evil Wink

Captured @f4, no external sharpening.. captured JPEG (some in-camera sharpening)
(clicking on picture will take to bigger version)



100% crop:


One more... check the full size...


Just looking forward for views..


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, another case of better try yourself instead of believing others.
What I mean is that you should always "test" a lens yourself, maybe you like it although others loathe it - or vice versa. Wink


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who told you any Helios is crap ? Especially the old ones ? This same false statement like from Carl Zeiss Jena MC lenses only the good ones, many people reported old single coated versions good as or better than MC ones. People are say many stupid things like this lens perform well on film camera but not a good performer on digital body. This is simple not true.I have a couple of really old Helios, I was shocked about their quality.


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If someone would said that close-by I have enough Helios I'm able to throw at him Very Happy

Just kidding, I would never waste them this way.

Michael


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One thing that is true is that with the times, the resolution of the Helios-44 lens was improved, and yes the final model (version 7) has a better resolution compared to the older versions.

But the difference in the resolution is not of the kind that will be immediately visible. It's only a few lines difference and in most situations the two lenses will appear to give the same result.

Then there is the issue of the materials and mechanics and under these respects, the older Russian lenses appear to be MUCH better than the newer ones. It is enough to compare any of the more recent MIR lenses, with their constantly broken irises, with the sturdy build of the old aluminium Helioses, to understand immediately the difference.


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
... any of the more recent MIR lenses, with their constantly broken irises, ...


Which Mir do you mean? Broken Iris I had in 2 jupiters...

Michael


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Borges wrote:
Orio wrote:
... any of the more recent MIR lenses, with their constantly broken irises, ...

Which Mir do you mean? Broken Iris I had in 2 jupiters...
Michael


I have had a problem with the MIR-20M iris (which I had to send to repairs) and the 36-B iris also sometimes does not close further than f/11.
The 1V also has a build problem although not specifically with the iris.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:12 pm    Post subject: Re: Helios-44 58mm f2 (Initial version) Reply with quote

Ballu wrote:
I always hear that Helios-44 is not a good lens (people uses crap/junk all type of word for this lens). What I have read, 44-2 and later versions are good.
Mine is not preset, just Helios-44 58mm f2, M42 mount.


Problems at Helios-44 begin at the sun in front and use of a film. Contrast usually noticeably falls and there are patches of light (hares).


PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow this thread was old!
I wonder where Ballu has gone - it's a lot of time he does not show up here!


PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Attila"] This same false statement like from Carl Zeiss Jena MC lenses only the good ones, many people reported old single coated versions good as or better than MC ones.[/quote]


Attila

I only have two CZJ in both MC an single coated. The 135 F/3,5 non MC have better vigneting at 3,5. The MC is contrastier. The non MC isn't better than MC, this have better 3D.

The pancolar 1,8 and 2 aren't the same lens. I can't compare.

Regards.