Helios 44-M 58/2 ?

[mike goldberg]

This could be a great 2nd lens for me, a new Kiev 4a user.
There's a lot of them on eBay; most are in Pentax/M42 mount.
Can someone explain this to me?
Thanks, mike

 

[xayraa33]

I think you need the Helios 103 for your Kiev rf camera.

 

[Trius]

The 44-M is f2.8. Here are a couple of *ist/Helios 44M shots from GeneW:

 

[xayraa33]

the Helios 44 was and is a 58mm f2 lens for SLRs.
it was made in: > M39(reflex register)
> M42
> Nikon F mount
>Pentax K mount
and even alleged to be made in Exakta mount.
the 44-M was the first to have auto diaphram, the older ones were all pre-set.
their lens coating improved with each model upgrade, although the second version , the Helios 44-2 is said to have come closest, contrast wise ,to the Zeiss Biotar it is copied from .
this one also has very nice bokeh for an inexpensive lens.

 

[mike goldberg]

Zowie!...
Thanks All, and especially to xayraa33 for the detailed info... and to GeneW for the crisp *ist/Helios 44M shots.

the Helios 44 was and is a 58mm f2 lens for SLRs.
it was made in: > M39(reflex register)
> M42
> Nikon F mount
>Pentax K mount
and even alleged to be made in Exakta mount.
the 44-M was the first to have auto diaphram, the older ones were all pre-set.
their lens coating improved with each model upgrade, although the second version , the Helios 44-2 is said to have come closest, contrast wise ,to the Zeiss Biotar it is copied from .
this one also has very nice bokeh for an inexpensive lens.

QUESTIONS:
- What does "bokeh" mean; it's not in the dictionary?
- Does Pentax K-mount mean that it will fit a *1st DS/DS2?

Things are coming together as follows: I'm getting to appreciate Russian glass, and the direction I'm likely to go in with digital SLR, is the DS/DS2. So, let's hear and thanks.
Ciao, mike

 

[zuikologist]

Mike - I use Super Takumar lenses on a DS2. Your Russian glass should work well.

 

[xayraa33]

you can use an M42 to Pentax K mount adapter, if your camera uses K mount lenses.
this will open up many avenues for FSU and other nation made glass in M42
like the fine FSU(and Russian) Mir 37mm f 2.8 lens, a winner at the 1958 Belgian Expo,
a total Russian design that has been in production till very recently.
an other legandary super sharp lens in M42 is the Industar 61 L/Z.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

What xayraa33 said. Pentax had two kinds of mounts so-called "universal" screw-mount lenses and K-mount lenses, both for SLRs. Many, many companies made lenses in the Universal mount and Cosina currently makes some. Pentax has always been pretty good about backwards compatibility. In this case, use of an adapter allows the broad range of lenses made in universal mount to be used with a modern DSLR. If you pursue this path, spend the extra bucks and get the Pentax brand adapter, rather than a less-expensive knock-off.

Bokeh is a Japanese term which, as noted, referrs to the quality of out-of-focus areas in a photograph. Some lenses (fast Nikon glass e.g. 50/1.4) render straight lines in the out-of-focus areas as double-lines. In Japan this is referred to as nissen or "drunken" boke and some consider it ugly. Boke "kings" such as the Contax G 45/2, Leica Summicrons, Contax Sonnars, among many others, render out-of-focus areas as smooth and creamy. Boke is a highly subjective term and on the 'Net can get ordinarily rational people sputtering at one another in adjective-laden diatribes.

I was tickled by the term when I learned it because it showed (to someone at the time obsessed with lens sharpness and resolving power) that there were different (often unrelated) criteria out there for judging a lens, criteria that might reflect different aesthetic, even cultural, categories. It was a sharp shot to the head for me. Many, many others feel that it is the rendering of in-focus areas of a photograph that really matter and that the out-of-focus areas (that is -- not the subject) should be left to fall where they may. Still others feel that as boke cannot be measured that it shouldn't be discussed. A Google search will quickly turn up heated discussions that include these and other positions on the term.

Ben Marks

 

[Trius]

My bad on the 44M being f2, not 2.8 as I said. Dunno why I had the brain fart!

 

[Trius]

I just uploaded some Helios shots to flickr.

 

[zuikologist]

I really like these - especially the first four shots, with the muted colours. The Agfa film and this lens seem to work well together. Some wierd bokeh in the millstone shot!

 

[Trius]

Zuik: Thanks. When I look at the scans in their original size, the grain is quite noticeable; not nearly as small and tight as current Fuji & Kodak offerings.

I used the lens wide open or nearly so for most of these shots. I wanted to see the bokeh, plus it was so cold that I wanted to make sure I had a high enough shutter speed to compensate for any shivering!

One interesting thing is that since it was sleeting/snowing at the time, falling snow/sleet in the OOF areas may add to the "interesting" character of the bokeh. In several of the shots areas that should be sharp appear not to be so, but it's mostly the falling sleet or snow.

I too like the more muted/pastel colours. IMO Agfa excelled at being colour neutral.

 

[zuikologist]

What's a little grain between friends!

I agree regarding Agfa - I associated them with a more European look rather than Kodak or Fuji, although older Ektachrome seems similar.. Not better or worse - just different.