MFlenses - A new life in a digital age
MFLenses 2026

Manual Focus Lenses Forum

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.
DiskFreeVault safely moves Mac apps and data to external storage.
Spotlight

Featured partner placement for the forum front page.

Helios-44 58mm f2 (Initial version)
Post new topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  


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


Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:23 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:23 pm
Post subject:
Reply
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


Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:27 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:27 pm
Post subject:
Reply
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.


Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:34 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:34 pm
Post subject:
Reply
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


Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:56 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:56 pm
Post subject:
Reply
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.


Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:00 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:00 pm
Post subject:
Reply
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


Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:41 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:41 pm
Post subject:
Reply
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.


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


Post
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:41 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:41 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Wow this thread was old!
I wonder where Ballu has gone - it's a lot of time he does not show up here!


Post
Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:14 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:14 pm
Post subject:
Reply
[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.
Post new topic Reply to topic
Page 1 of 1