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 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:24 am    Post subject: Helios 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7? Reply with quote
OK, I have experienced some wonderful Russian glass and I am looking for the sharpest of the available crop of cheapish Russian lenses.
I have narrowed it down to Helios 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7 based on reputation.
Is there any definitive evidence to recommend one over the other.
Also, having made a recommendation, does it matter where in Russia it was made - eg is a LZOZ lens better than a FED or ZOMZ or KMZ or Valdai (names picked at random and I have no idea if the lenses I am looking at were actually made there)
Your responses are appreciated
Kind regards
OH

Last edited by Oldhand on Sat Oct 03, 2015 11:19 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would rate the Zenitar a tack sharper/better than the Helios. However, I didn't compare them directly till date.
In practice there isn't much difference. My copies are made by KMZ which generally delivers very good quality.
Most of my Russian lenses come from KMZ.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Zenitar is a lot sharper. Someone once posted the resolution figures for all the Helios 44s and the Zenitars and the 44M-7 was something like 50-55lp/mm in the centre but the Zenitar was over 70. The Zenitar is also more highly corrected so you don't get the glow and swirl at large apertures.

Zenitar on Sony a850:





PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My thread about the Zenitar may be helpful:
http://forum.mflenses.com/zenitar-50mm-f1-7-domestic-version-on-ricoh-gxr-m-t71542.html


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 12:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Helios 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7? Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
OK, I have experienced some wonderful Russian glass and I am looking for the sharpest of the available crop of cheapish Russian lenses.
I have narrowed it down to Helios 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7 based on reputation.
Is there any definitive evidence to recommend one over the other.
Also, having made a recommendation, does it matter where in Russia it was made - eg is a LZOZ lens better than a FED or ZOMZ or KMZ or Valdai (names picked at random and I have no idea if the lenses I am looking at were actually made there)
Your responses are appreciated
Kind regards
OH


Zenitar-M 50/1.7 is not the sharpest lens - 43/24 lines/mm in center/corners, it is also not multi coated.
Helios 44M-7 is sharper - 50/30 lines/mm in center/corners.

If you are looking for the sharp Russian lens check Zenitar-M2 50/2.0 - 70/45 lines/mm in center/corners. But it is a plastic lens that is not so cheap nowadays.

Zenitar-M 50/1.7 though is very nice lens with good character. BTW it is made only by KMZ. Helios 44M-7 is made only by VOMZ and I think Zenitar-M2 50/2.0 is also made only by KMZ but not 100% sure.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have both the Zenitar-M 50mm f/1.7 and the Helios-44M-7 and the Zenitar is much sharper than the Helios.
Helios-44M-7 was exclusively manufactured by the Valdai factory, just like its predecessor (44M-6).
You might also want to check the MC Zenitar-M 50mm f/1.9 (manufactured by the KMZ).


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The old Biotar design which is shared by the Helios 44 can't really compete with Zenitar-M's design. I don't buy those resolution numbers.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zenith all day long my favourite lens in the 50mm


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Zenitar on Sony a850:




I really like this scene. Very cinematic.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cheers. I like it's simplicity.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
+1, this would probably push the Zenitar prices further Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I bought mine a few yeas ago very cheap because it was on a Zenit 122. 99% of Zenits for sale in the UK have a Helios on them, but every so often, a Zenitar comes along.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:53 am    Post subject: Re: Helios 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7? Reply with quote
Thank you everyone for your considered replies.
From them I have plenty to consider.

dimitrygo wrote:


Zenitar-M 50/1.7 is not the sharpest lens - 43/24 lines/mm in center/corners, it is also not multi coated.
Helios 44M-7 is sharper - 50/30 lines/mm in center/corners.

If you are looking for the sharp Russian lens check Zenitar-M2 50/2.0 - 70/45 lines/mm in center/corners. But it is a plastic lens that is not so cheap nowadays.

Zenitar-M 50/1.7 though is very nice lens with good character. BTW it is made only by KMZ. Helios 44M-7 is made only by VOMZ and I think Zenitar-M2 50/2.0 is also made only by KMZ but not 100% sure.


Is the Zenitar-M2 50/2.0 of the same configuration as the Helios - or is what I have read correct, in that it is a newer and different design?
And if so, is it similar in design to the Zenitar 1.7/50
OH


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Helios 44 is a 6e/4g planar type. The Zenitar is a 6e/5g ultron type with three air spaced elements in the front group.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:14 am    Post subject: Re: Helios 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7? Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
Is the Zenitar-M2 50/2.0 of the same configuration as the Helios - or is what I have read correct, in that it is a newer and different design?
And if so, is it similar in design to the Zenitar 1.7/50


Zenitar 2.0 and Helios are slightly different 6/4 designs and Zenitar 1.7 is a totally different 6/5 design. All of them have 6 aperture blades, though there is a Zenitar 1.7 with only 2 blades as well (resulting in a quadratic aperture opening).
So I would assume that both 2.0 lenses are rather comparable and the 1.7 lens is different.

Interestingly, it is said that both the newer 2.0 lenses have a slightly higher resolution than the Zenitar 1.7 lens (at least from the Russian advertising folders). Wink

However, I would in any case prefer the Zenitar 1.7. It's really a very nice lens what you can also see in my thread about this lens posted earlier here, though I have "only" the domestic version with Cyrillic lettering.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you Ian.
Thank you Thomas for the clarification of the differences between the three.
OH


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:25 am    Post subject: Re: Helios 44M-7 or Zenitar 50/1.7? Reply with quote
dimitrygo wrote:
Zenitar-M2 50/2.0 - 70/45 lines/mm in center/corners.

I need to correct myself - the above resolution is from the first test batch. The real resolution of the production copies is 65/40 lines/mm.
The good source of the Russian lens info is http://www.zenitcamera.com/catalog/lenseslist.html


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zenitar 50 1.7@1.7
DSC00080p by Simeon Kolev, on Flickr
Take a look at the full size file. I think it is nice for a russian lens wide open...
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5835/21870820285_e528867fb5_o.jpg


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks very good indeed. Has enyone compared the Zenitar against the Planar 50/1.7 or the Helios 77m-4 50/1.8?

And what is the prefered type, I see there i both MC and square aperture versions of this lens...?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Haven't compared it to Planar but it's sharper than Helios-77M-4. And about the versions: there is a regular Zenitar-M 50mm f/1.7, the MC version (extremely rare) and a rare and very expensive MC Zenitar-ME1 50mm f/1.7 that has a 2-bladed aperture. It's much more contrasty than the regular, non-MC version but the bokeh gets strange and distracting when closed down. There is also a MC Zenitar-M 50mm f/1.9 but I haven't tested it yet. If it has the typical Zenitar optical formula, it should be better than its predecessors.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zenitar 50 1.9 has nothing in common with the 1.7 Smile It is quite worse.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Crying or Very sad


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There is a whole bunch of Zenitars 50/1.7:
Zenitar-M ~ the most common version; 6-bladed aperture; single-coated
MC Zenitar-M ~ an extremely rare (manufactured only 14 pcs!?) version of the common Zenitar-M; 6-bladed aperture; multi-coated
MC Zenitar-ME1 ~ a rare (and very expensive) version equipped with electric connection to camera body transmitting aperture info; curious dual-bladed aperture; multi-coated
MC Zenitar-ME1 (v1980) ~ an extremely rare (1980 only) version of MC Zenitar-ME1 with different aperture; 4-bladed aperture; multi-coated
Zenitar-ME-4 ~ an extremely rare version equipped with electric connection to camera body transmitting aperture info; 6-bladed aperture; single-coated


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nordentro wrote:
Looks very good indeed. Has enyone compared the Zenitar against the Planar 50/1.7 or the Helios 77m-4 50/1.8?

And what is the prefered type, I see there i both MC and square aperture versions of this lens...?


Well, I don't have any 50/1.7 Planar but the slightly better Rollei/Voigtländer Ultron 50/1.8 and the Zenitar-M 50/1.7 in 6 blade version which are in terms of optical formula comparable lenses (Ultron variants), though the Voigtländer is 7/6 and the Zenitar is 6/5. The Helios 77 is more likely comparable to the Helios 44 as both have the 6/4 double-Gauss/Planar formula.

From my pictures both with my Ricoh GXR-M (APS-C) and the Sony A850 (FF) they are hardly distinguishable and I would rate both lenses as very excellent and comparable in performance. Also the bokeh is quite similar and lacks of fancy bubbles or other strange artifacts.

Pictures of both of my lenses are already published here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/zenitar-50mm-f1-7-domestic-version-on-ricoh-gxr-m-t71542.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/voigtlnder-color-ultron-50mm-f1-8-in-m42-singapore-t72279.html


However, I can make some direct comparison shots of both lenses if you wish. Just let me know.
I've planned it anyway out of curiosity. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Planar is a 7/6 too, well enough heard about this Zenitar lens, I just bought one Wink
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2