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 44-2 58m f2
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 11:46 pm    Post subject: Helios 44-2 58m f2 Reply with quote

I took some samples today with this beautiful lens:








PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 11:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great samples ! Especially first one!


PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice shots, Piticu!

Which camera are you using for them?.
Are you using any extension tube or similar?
Thanks!


Jes.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Number 4 and 5 look like Sorbus torminalis !
I looked for this tree for very long!
In the past was very common, today hard to find except in the wild.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Piticu -- superb!

You know how to play with bokeh !

tf


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you guys. I'm glad that you liked the samples.
Jesito wrote:
Which camera are you using for them?.
Are you using any extension tube or similar?

A Nikon D2x Jes, with no extension tube, just a glass-less adapter and a dirty sensor Embarassed
Orio wrote:
Number 4 and 5 look like Sorbus torminalis !
I looked for this tree for very long!

I know almost nothing about trees but from what i've seen on wikipedia, it could be. I'll ask my father in law about it, he's a forester and he should know for sure what is it.


Last edited by piticu on Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:18 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No actually, at a second look I am sure it's a Crataegus species.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

All I know for sure Orio is that there is a lot of Rosa canina in that aria, you can still see some fruits:

pic taken with a Vivitar 28mm f2.8 f-mount


Last edited by piticu on Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:17 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great shots.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like #4. The sun light looks very well controlled and thought out.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is my Zenit's Lens. Excellent photos. Maybe one day i can take photos like yours using my Zenit.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can take great photos using ANY camere, it really doesn't matter if it's a Zenit, a Nikon or something else — they're just tools Smile


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Human takes the photos, not cameras ?! Smile I am learning using this wonderful site. Thanks.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

exen wrote:
Human takes the photos, not cameras ?!
I didn't exactly said that but feel free to understand whatever suits you Smile


PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 44-2 is one of the 20th century's greatest pleasant surprises for the money.
Many people are still put off buying one because they still think something as cheap and plentiful can't be as good as anything with a brand name - how wrong they are.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Farside wrote:
The 44-2 is one of the 20th century's greatest pleasant surprises for the money.
Many people are still put off buying one because they still think something as cheap and plentiful can't be as good as anything with a brand name - how wrong they are.
Couldn't agree more. But i don't think it's entirely their fault, let's not forget the marketing guys Cool Cool Cool


PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Farside wrote:
The 44-2 is one of the 20th century's greatest pleasant surprises for the money.
Many people are still put off buying one because they still think something as cheap and plentiful can't be as good as anything with a brand name - how wrong they are.


The same can be said of many older Russian lenses. Superb performance for a bargain price. I also think that people are sometimes put off by the reputation for uneven quality, a reputation not entire undeserved if we are talking about FSU lenses.

I have never found a Russian lens I didn't like. I realize that I've been lucky in terms of build quality, but it's more than that. Russian lenses have a certain distinctive touch in their image rendering, very rich tones though not super high contrast -- really closer to "old German" than anything else manufactured elsewhere after about 1970 or '75.

While most German makers started chasing the high-contrast Japanese look about 35 years ago, Russian manufacturers basically stuck with the standards of the late 1940s and early 50s. (After all, they didn't have to worry about commercial success!) In many ways the Russians were the "keepers of the flame" in terms of subtle, naturalistic, tonal rendering.

It's like being able to buy a classic Zeiss lens at one-tenth the price, and usually in better condition.

I do have to qualify one statement above: I think Leica never really abandoned the tonal standards that distinguished good German lenses before WWII and in the decade and a half after. But Leica glass isn't a bargain.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 7:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This one has the highest price/performance ratio among my lenses, a clear winner for just 8USD. My test samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yalcinaydin/sets/7215760757603868/


PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Farside wrote:
The 44-2 is one of the 20th century's greatest pleasant surprises for the money.


The 44-6 is much, much greater pleasure. Exactly for the same money. Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LittleAlex wrote:
The 44-6 is much, much greater


I like 44-3! Laughing Wink


PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prometheus wrote:
I like 44-3! Laughing Wink
I got one yesterday, unfortunately broken


PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prometheus wrote:
LittleAlex wrote:
The 44-6 is much, much greater


I like 44-3! Laughing Wink


I believe you never had the chance to compare. If you would, you will immediately change your preferences. Really it was the best line of the Hellos lens. Some claim that 44-7 was even better, but my own comparison showed clearly the supremacy of the 44-6. However, it might be due to the individual quality of my particular exemplar of 44-7.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

piticu wrote:
Prometheus wrote:
I like 44-3! Laughing Wink
I got one yesterday, unfortunately broken


how much did you pay?


PostPosted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Helios 44-2. This lens never stops surprising








Last edited by Asa100 on Sat Nov 29, 2008 2:16 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scribo wrote:
Farside wrote:
The 44-2 is one of the 20th century's greatest pleasant surprises for the money.
Many people are still put off buying one because they still think something as cheap and plentiful can't be as good as anything with a brand name - how wrong they are.


The same can be said of many older Russian lenses. Superb performance for a bargain price. I also think that people are sometimes put off by the reputation for uneven quality, a reputation not entire undeserved if we are talking about FSU lenses.

I have never found a Russian lens I didn't like. I realize that I've been lucky in terms of build quality, but it's more than that. Russian lenses have a certain distinctive touch in their image rendering, very rich tones though not super high contrast -- really closer to "old German" than anything else manufactured elsewhere after about 1970 or '75.

While most German makers started chasing the high-contrast Japanese look about 35 years ago, Russian manufacturers basically stuck with the standards of the late 1940s and early 50s. (After all, they didn't have to worry about commercial success!) In many ways the Russians were the "keepers of the flame" in terms of subtle, naturalistic, tonal rendering.

It's like being able to buy a classic Zeiss lens at one-tenth the price, and usually in better condition.

I do have to qualify one statement above: I think Leica never really abandoned the tonal standards that distinguished good German lenses before WWII and in the decade and a half after. But Leica glass isn't a bargain.


They took technology, glass , experts ,machinery from Germans after WWII that was a very good start for them and we should not forget talents of Russian people.