Helios 44 Thread - Russia's Best Kept Secret?

Agree on the 135mm. It's a lovely lens to use.
 
My first SLR was a Zenit 'B' with a Helios 44 - It was about £25 if I remember rightly, which actually was a weeks wages at the time. I couldn't afford the Zenit 'E' with the integral light meter though. I never had any good photos with it so I sold it on for a Canonet. However, I have been quite taken with all your images and so I too have taken the plunge and bought a clean one from ebay (£26) - so I'll give it a go and hope I can get something as good as you guys.
 
Good job there's plenty of these lenses about! [emoji1]
 
Hi All
I have a 44m-4 2/58, can anyone play, I think you can tell the year of the lens by the first two numbers of the S/N,
90 = 1969
00 = 1970
71 = 1971
72 = 1972
etc
mine starts with 83, got it on ebay, in good nick but not as nice as Dunc's

Pete
 
There were Helios 44s in the 'sixties, so they didn't use that method. On the other hand, it's quite possible that the numbering schemes changed over time, both during and after the Soviet era.
 
nothing super special but this was over 6 years ago and my first dip into old manual lenses was a Helios 44 on an Oly E-410 and was responsible in making me less scared of making my own decisions.. I have had a couple of Helios since then, 100% trustworthy IMO

4281705630_10e4e04463_b.jpg
 
So is the 135mm C.Zeiss Jenna recommend by anyone? What kind of money do they fetch via the bay etc? Has anyone any samples from the 135mm if you don't mind please... I must get a 42 adapter for my Helios 44/2 lens for my D810 and see what results that brings.

Appreciated
 
Not sure but I think I have seen something about Nikon adaptors needing a glass element in them dropping the IQ, may be worth doing some research before you buy, may be totally wrong on this.

Pete
 
PeterTheJet said:
Not sure but I think I have seen something about Nikon adaptors needing a glass element in them dropping the IQ, may be worth doing some research before you buy, may be totally wrong on this.

Pete
Click to expand...

I think its obtain infinity.
 
Mad Bokehhh! :)
 
macvisual said:
So is the 135mm C.Zeiss Jenna recommend by anyone? What kind of money do they fetch via the bay etc? Has anyone any samples from the 135mm if you don't mind please... I must get a 42 adapter for my Helios 44/2 lens for my D810 and see what results that brings.

Appreciated
Click to expand...

Peter, I have plenty of shots taken with the CZ 135mm HERE. Look for a 5th generation with a 4 digit serial number (marked "Electric") if you can find one. They're reportedly the best version and mine is certainly a cracker.
 
Interesting that EXIF data is recorded at all. My Helios certainly has no contacts between the lens and body hence no EXIF data is recorded.
 
Just for anyone with Nikon looking at these lenses, I just thought i would add something. I had a slightly different version to the one in the first post, mine looked like this one:

(not my picture so I've linked it)

http://www.abload.de/img/sdim3201howuw.jpg

I had it on an M42-Nikon adapter, but unfortunately the rear element fouled the adapter and wouldn't focus properly despite having one of the elements in the adapter; i can't remember if it was close objects or far I couldn't get in focus now, it's been a few years since i've used it! I did have another version of this lens, the same as the original post but it was pretty stiff so I never really used it so I can't comment on it!

I found that image on a really handy thread that shows loads of different versions that may be helpful to some (y)

http://forum.mflenses.com/complete-list-of-helios-lenses-getting-closer-t26100.html
 
Last edited:
I got this lens but haven't tested it yet. Any recommended adapter to work in Nikon bodies? Thanks
 
Well my Helios arrived yesterday and my adapter arrived this morning - I have been having a play around and found the lens to be surprisingly sharp although lacking a bit in the contrast dept. It is blowing a gale here today - I live two miles from the sea and half way up a hill and nothing is staying still enough to manually focus the lens on my XE-1. But I may have had a bit of success in the swirly bokeh mission. This is just in my garden this afternoon:-

Swirly1_zpsc6cwgtii.jpg


Cheers
 
You can almost hear the birds singing and the church bells ringing :)

Are we, as photographers, focusing (sic) excessively on performance?

I reckon we should be focusing more on the images we make.
 
Last edited:
kendo1 said:
You can almost hear the birds singing and the church bells ringing :)

Are we, as photographers, focusing (sic) excessively on performance?

I reckon we should be focusing more on the images we make.
Click to expand...

I agree. I also think that newcomers more often than not waste a whole lot of money buying the very latest and "best" pro lenses only to eventually discover that some of the oldies like this, which can comparatively be bought for pennies, produce results that are more than good enough, especially when you're printing at no larger than A3 or displaying online. The Vivitar 55m f/2.8 Komine macro lens is another. Around £70 for a good one and Thomas Shahan's go to lens. The results he gets with that lens are just incredible and I've seen very few photographers with any lens that can match his imagery.
 
Yep, there was that thread a few days ago by a newbie to the forum who was deciding not to buy the Sony 16-50 due to performance issues that weren't there.

The Helios can resolve 38/20 lines a mm, I suspect the Sony is twice that. (I'll have to check that though :) )
 
kendo1 said:
Yep, there was that thread a few days ago by a newbie to the forum who was deciding not to buy the Sony 16-50 due to performance issues that weren't there.

The Helios can resolve 38/20 lines a mm, I suspect the Sony is twice that. (I'll have to check that though :) )
Click to expand...

Yep, it's a shame but it's synonymous with the age of the internet forums. I have to admit to doing the same thing myself early on. I knew nothing about lenses, had a good disposable income so I threw money at the problem. Then I got to know Bjorn Rorslett whilst living in Scandinavia and he rather changed the way I thought, to an extent. I remember seeing the images he produced on a Nikon D1 and by the time we got to the D2X etc.. the forums were awash with amateurs, who rarely shot a photo in anger, demanding more pixels and different lenses and I could not fathom why. Often now, when I browse the images of my favourite photographers, I'm enthralled at the lenses many use. Quite often they're older, outdated lenses but the images they produce are far from it.
 
Is there any chance that the rear element of the Helios could be hit by the mirror? I'm talking full frame (5Diii), if that's a factor.

Unless I've missed it, nobody's mentioned this through the thread.

Mike.
 
I use my Helios lens with a film EOS camera (ie full frame!) and the mirror has plenty of room. They were designed to be used with full frame SLRs.
 
Last edited:
Bicko said:
Is there any chance that the rear element of the Helios could be hit by the mirror? I'm talking full frame (5Diii), if that's a factor.

Unless I've missed it, nobody's mentioned this through the thread.

Mike.
Click to expand...

I don't remember having an issue with my 6D if that helps.
 
Superb images above......wOw. I've maybe asked before (sorry), anyone shoot this (awesome) lens on a Nikon D810 body...? Any problemsor...?...or just add a m42 adapter and away you go....?

Thanks;
Pete
 
macvisual said:
Superb images above......wOw. I've maybe asked before (sorry), anyone shoot this (awesome) lens on a Nikon D810 body...? Any problemsor...?...or just add a m42 adapter and away you go....?

Thanks;
Pete
Click to expand...

Thanks Pete I can't answer your question regarding Nikon these were shot on a Fuji XT1 with K & F Concept adapter from Amazon but its probably the best £30 I have spent.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top