View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 Posts: 2190 Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:02 pm Post subject: Change in Helicoid Construction - Arsat/Volna 80mm |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
This is just a quick note about the arsat and volna lenses. I have 4 of these lenses, 3 of them in kiev 60 mount the other in Kiev 88. The ones in kiev 60 are from '93, '94, and '95. I had never noticed before, but the lens from '93 has a significantly longer focus throw. Probably ~150 degrees compared to the ~80 of the newer lenses. It is also about 20 grams heavier. All have the same minimum focus distance of 0.6m (compared to the 1m of an actual biometar). Just thought it was interesting that perhaps all these lenses aren't quite identical...
~Marc |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Scheimpflug
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1888 Location: New Zealand / USA
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Scheimpflug wrote:
Interesting... Which style do you prefer? _________________ Sigma DP1, Nikon D40 (hers ), Polaroid x530, Pentax P30t, Pentax P50, (P30t/P50 K-A to Nikon F body mount conversion)
Nikon: 18-55/3.5-5.6 "G ED II DX" (F) Soligor: 28/2.8 (FL->F converted), 135/3.5 (F), 3x TC (F, modified) Kalimar: 28-85/3.5 (F)
Vivitar: 70-210/2.8-4.0 Version 3 (F), Tele 500/6.3 Preset (F), 19/3.8 (F) Minolta: 300/5.6 (SR/MC/MD pending F conversion)
Tamron: 28/2.8 (Adaptall) Panagor: 28/2.5 (FD) Aetna: 300/5.6 (F) Osawa: MC 28/2.8 (F)
Vintage Lenses: Dallmeyer: 1940s A.M. 14in 356mm f4 (ULF->M42) 1930s Adon Telephoto Taylor, Taylor & Hobson: 1880s Rapid Rectilinear 8 1/2 x 6 1/2 11.31in f/8 (LF->?)
Parts Lenses: Nikon 35-135/3.5-4.5 (F), Sigma 70-210/4.5 (F), Nikon 50/1.8 Series E (F) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE
|
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:34 am Post subject: Re: Change in Helicoid Construction - Arsat/Volna 80mm |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
themoleman342 wrote: |
Just thought it was interesting that perhaps all these lenses aren't quite identical...
|
I had a few Helios-44M-6 lenses that were totally different in looks and mechanical construction, but optically behaved identically. This was the case because they were made by different factories (KMZ and Vologda in my case, but I know there were other very different versions made by other factories, too). _________________ List of lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
keltzar
Joined: 22 Apr 2010 Posts: 70
|
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
keltzar wrote:
... are you sure they were all M-6 to start with?
M4 to M7 were multicoated, M1 to M3 were not. M2 is the most common, and M3 is probably the rarest.
M is probably the hardest to find but its build quality is the best. It is more commonly seen in Zenit M39. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 Posts: 2190 Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
Quote: |
I had a few Helios-44M-6 lenses that were totally different in looks and mechanical construction, but optically behaved identically. This was the case because they were made by different factories (KMZ and Vologda in my case, but I know there were other very different versions made by other factories, too). |
All of the arsat/volna lenses were made by arsenal so there must have been a conscious choice to change the construction in this manner.
Quote: |
Which style do you prefer? |
I'm not quite sure yet. The later version are really quick to focus, but a bit more precision is always helpful. I guess it will come down to how they perform optically. Maybe it's time to test them... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE
|
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
keltzar wrote: |
... are you sure they were all M-6 to start with?
M4 to M7 were multicoated, M1 to M3 were not. M2 is the most common, and M3 is probably the rarest. |
Oh, yes, I am pretty sure Have a look at this:
http://zenit.istra.ru/archive/lenses/helios-44.html depicts a variety of styles these lenses came in; not even close to listing all of them, as I had lenses that looked different yet (for example, the site lists MC H44M-6 as having a 52mm filter thread; mine was 49mm).
Not all H44M-4 through M-7 were multicoated. I have a KMZ-made single-coated H44M-4 to prove. I have also seen MC versions of H44M-3; there really *was* a lot of variation among them. _________________ List of lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
keltzar
Joined: 22 Apr 2010 Posts: 70
|
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
keltzar wrote:
Yeah. Look at the logos on the lens . I can't recall which the better factories were, but there are differences as you say.
IMHO, the best are the M2 for character, and the M7 for final evolution. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE
|
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
keltzar wrote: |
Yeah. Look at the logos on the lens . I can't recall which the better factories were, but there are differences as you say. |
This particular sample was made in Vologda. It's quite sharp, and its internal blackening is better than some H44's from other factories. I haven't heard of many quality issues with H44M-6 and M-7 lenses; most variation seems to be with the most common versions including 44-2, 44M, and 44M-4. I had two H44-2's, one was crap, another one surprisingly sharp in the center but *very* prone to flare even in slightest backlight. On the other hand, my single-coated H44M-4 is great, even better than the later MC Helios-77M. Go figure. _________________ List of lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
keltzar
Joined: 22 Apr 2010 Posts: 70
|
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
keltzar wrote:
... then you haven't seen M6 and M7 lenses with rusty pins and springs ..!
Well, its a problem. I was going to buy an M7 once and while playing with it in the shop as I was handing the money over ... the rusty bits snapped and the aperture was fouled.
Honestly, having owned at least 30-40 different M42 lenses in 50mm, I can honestly say the best value are really the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 lenses. most of them work flawlessly for years needing no new oil or servicing...
I recall quoting this stat on another forum once when I was actively buying:
70% of CZJ and soviet lenses I receive need servicing, some of which I did myself.
In comparison, only 10-20% of Pentax screwmount lenses ever did.
Having held them thereafter for 5-10 yrs ... most of the pentax lenses are still working flawlessly, whereas the Zeiss Jena and soviet lenses often need another round of servicing.
There is a fundamental design flaw in many of the E.German and some russian lenses - the aperture module is exposed to the focusing helicoid. As the grease degrades and evaporates, this leaves haze on the glass and oil which fouls up the blades.
Honestly, if you plan on collecting a good number of these old lenses.. you really need to know how to do your own servicing or the maintenance will cost a bomb. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|