Helios 40-2 85mm/1.5

[esmodus]

Does anybody have experience with putting a Helios 40-2 lens on a DSLR, what sort of image quality can one expect at 7-10 metres at full aperture?
I am thinking of getting one for low light magazine stuff but have heard that it is not very good beyond 1-2 metres.

esmodus

[Attila]

Nice to see you here!
I had two copies from Helios-40-2 85mm f1.5 in past I sold both of them and kept Helios-40 85mm f1.5 both version are excellent. Helios-40-2 has some practical benefits , optical quality is same. I used in portrait an close up actions I never used longer distance than a few meters. Orio still have it , I guess he will able to help you to show some samples in required distance.

[Abbazz]

[Orio]

The distance you mention is the typical portrait distance and it's the best working distance for the lens.

Wide open the Helios-40-2 is dreamy, very flaring and with a painterly bokeh. The in-focus area is sharp, but it's so shallow that this is barely of any importance.

I don't have wide open samples because I never use the lens that way - although most people who buy it does. I prefer to use it at or around f/8 which is where in my opinion it really shines.

So here's a few samples taken with a 400D and the Helios-40-2 stopped down to f/8 or f/5.6


















If wide open performance is crucial for you, I would suggest you to buy a Contax Planar 1.4/85 (if your camera supports it).
You should spend more or less the same money as for the Helios-40-2
The Planar 1.4/85 is the same type of lens (a double-Gauss), but it's sharper wide open, and not flaring - giving a more realistic performance. The Helios is to be preferred instead when you want to create an unreal, dreamy atmosphere.
-

[Orio]

[montecarlo]

[Borges]

[VGR]

really fantastic lens:

f/1.5:

[Riku]

[Farside]

[Attila]

[Orio]

The highlight bokeh is the weak point of this lens.
But without high lights the bokeh is excellent.

As for M39, there is a little problem with infinity focus for two reasons:

- the M39 register distance (I am speaking of reflex system, not Leica's M39) is not identical to M42. There is a small difference (M39 slightly shorter)

- The Helios-40 has a little metal thickness at the base of the M39 thread that makes it impossible for the adapter to get in touch with the base of the lens.

Having that said, the focus difference is not big and a good sandpapering of the adapter will probably fix it. I never sandpapered an adapter for my Helios-40 copy because I don't find it important to have true infinity focus on this lens, as it's a lens for portraits and the focusing range (about 30 m for me on EOS) is more than enough - I have other lenses that I can use for infinity.
But in any case, even without any adjustment, stopping the Helios-40 down to about f/8 will deliver a more than acceptable infinity definition.
-

[Riku]

I don't think Helios-40 was even made for rangefinders?


I don't think can be an adapter problem because there is no way this lens getting closer to the sensor... lens touches the mount. Maybe early russian M39 SLR's were sligthly shorter register distance? I have read about some problems with M39 SLR lenses My lens looks very clean inside and picture quality is excellent.

Edit: Thanks Orio... you cleared it up

[Attila]

I had never problem with any M39 SLR lenses on Olympus.

[Farside]

[Attila]

Jupiter-9,Jupiter-11 available for both system with same mount M39 and both of them available in M42 mount. Both lens shapes are different for range finder. They are tall compare with SLR version.

[Riku]

[Attila]

I just answered for Farside as I know Helios-40 never made for range finder.

[Abbazz]

[Orio]

Like it often happens in life, that a defect can make a woman unforgettable, also with lenses the same thing can happen. This defect of the Helios-40(-2) is what makes it a unique lens, and the charme of some photos taken with is happens exactly because of this defect.

[Borges]

[Abbazz]