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 44-3 MC and 44-2 comparison :)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:12 pm    Post subject: Helios 44-3 MC and 44-2 comparison :) Reply with quote

Here are some photos comparing the two lenses ...

44-2 on the left | 44-3 on the right
(click for bigger pics)











44-3 has more contrast, warmer colours, better sharpness in the center and corners ... while 44-2 - slightly better bokeh (for my taste at least).

Any comments are welcome Smile ...


PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

More contrast yes, but is it actually sharper? A contrast hike in PP for the 44-2 to match the 44-3 would be interesting for comparison.

I rarely use a Helios on film because it lacks the contrast for my taste.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some chart photos :

centre


corners


PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You have a less than great copy of the 44-2, a good copy would be much better than this.

These sorts of tests reveal very little that matters, even this copy of the 44-2 you have would be capable of very nice pics after a little bit of PP.

The differences between the two sets of results are miniscule, and some PP would nullify them altogether.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
"a good copy (of the 44-2) would be much better than this ... the differences between the two sets of results are miniscule"

So either the 44-2 is much better than the 44-3 (and the figures below suggest otherwise) or these two statements are inconsistent.

Helios-44-2 - resolution: 38/20
Helios-44-3 - resolution: 40/21


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

electricnerve wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
"a good copy (of the 44-2) would be much better than this ... the differences between the two sets of results are miniscule"

So either the 44-2 is much better than the 44-3 (and the figures below suggest otherwise) or these two statements are inconsistent.


Ian has provided us with many inconsistent statements in the past Wink

@ stilian: Thanks for your effort to provide reliable information - the differences in contrast ar visible, and they do matter in certain circumstances. Not everybody has the time to lots of post-processing, especially when shooting larger reportages Wink

Stephan


PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very well done tests, stilian!

Anyway, the main weakness of the Helios 44-x lenses is the inconsistency between different samples of the same lens due to the poor quality control and/or extensive use/abuse. Therefore such a test comparing 2 Helios 44-X lenses is only relevant for the very 2 samples tested and cannot be generalised. If the Bokeh, contrast and flare resistance are little affected by the lack of quality invariance the sharpness is more affected. I too believe that exist better samples of the Helios 44-2, with better sharpness.

stevemark wrote:
Ian has provided us with many inconsistent statements in the past Wink

That's not a fair remark, Stephan. Of course nobody is perfect but Ian had, over the years, an important contribution on this forum and we all have learned a lot of things from him.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stilian , I appreciate that you took the time to make the comparison .

Great Work , Thanks Like 1


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

N* Serie of both lenses, please


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 3:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ah have 2 x Helios 44-2 (KMZ), 2 x MMZ, 1 x Valdai. They are all in excellent condition; ah'd say the 2 KMZs are slightly sharper and render colours more fully than the others. The ones which blow them all away are my 44M-4s. One in excellent cosmetic and mechanical condition, the other, bashed about, dings and dents but still performs immaculately. Due in no small part tae the fact that the optics are still mint. These two lenses are visibly superior tae my 44-2s, no mean feat.

Unlike many stories, here and elsewhere, ah find that these lenses, regardless of type, or factory, are remarkably consistent in build, coatings etc. Comments have been made about lens coatings. Every lens manufacturer changed coatings (and still do) mid-run. Minolta was (in)famous for changing/upgrading, improved coatings several times a year as better more consistent coatings became available. Ah reckon that's exactly what Helios did as well.

Ah'd recommend folk tae look out for the black Helios 44, 8 blades. It's nearly as good as the silver, 13 bladed version and much cheaper (snob value)... Wink Cool


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My KMZ 44-2 easily out performs your 44-2, so all that means is that you really need a much larger sampling of lenses from each manufacture for each model to begin to generalize the qualities for any particular version.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank's stilian for posting those samples.

I have a 44-2 (1983) from Valdai plant in good cosmetic condition. It may also have been serviced in the past by an earlier owner.
I love these Helios lenses and I may pick up another sample sometime. Maybe a 44M-7 or a silver 44-2.
Would the old silver 13 blades be better than my 1983 Valdai version?
I don't have another sample to directly compare with my Valdai sample, but I think I've got lucky because I found it very sharp.

Cátia by Jaime Silva, on Flickr

Cátia by Jaime Silva, on Flickr


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JRSILVA: That first pic. is a Great shot and the sun playing on the model`s hair is " the icing on the cake " , Good work.

There`s No denying , them Helios lenses are exellent.

Like 1


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wait... it's just the coatings that "officially" change between the 44's ?

My experience with a couple of 44m4's was that they were remarkable. I never bothered with the m6,7,2 etc as I though the optical formula was consistent.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Novicus wrote:
JRSILVA: That first pic. is a Great shot and the sun playing on the model`s hair is " the icing on the cake " , Good work.

There`s No denying , them Helios lenses are exellent.

Like 1


Thank you!
I have to use it more.
Now that Spring is is starting and sun is shinning more often, green foliage will provide plenty of bokeh.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tromboads wrote:
Wait... it's just the coatings that "officially" change between the 44's ?

My experience with a couple of 44m4's was that they were remarkable. I never bothered with the m6,7,2 etc as I though the optical formula was consistent.



No. The earliest Helios 44 had a min, aperture of f22, became f16 in subsequent models. each end no. e.g.... 4,5,6 denotes a change tae the resolution...



#1

[/img]


PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah but changing the aperture mechanism doesn't require a change in optics. So the optics were different? across the 44's?


PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really don't know which one is better (prefered would be the right term) between your 2 Helios-44 but this is interesting. Subject has more contrast and colors seems to be better rendered (more subtile color variations) for the 44-3.

Concerning the resolution of each one, you just can't tell picking 1 of each model. Even in the same years and same factory there is always a significant difference in each Helios-44 : https://flic.kr/s/aHskqTdtzv
I'm testing different models each day and i'm always surprised to see how the differences can be huge in sharpness, color and contrast. I'm always using those quick chart tests to spot a good, average or bad 44, to know if it will be valuable to be cleaned.

But this not makes a good or bad lens. For exemple, one of the last Helios-44-2 i sold was this one (MMZ from 1977) : https://flic.kr/p/Ds3gzW, if you compare with its compagnions from Valdai, it seems not to be the sharpest...but it was one of the best when shooting, very nice colors, great contrast and very good reaction to difficult shooting conditions.
Same with silver 13 or 8 blades from KMZ, they are for me the best H-44 you can find, because of a general character and not just definition result. On paper we should just find a H-44M7.

So...i like this kind of tests, side by side it's always nice to have same condition tests? But it's no way to make any final conclusion or long discussions on those results.