50/2 Collapsible Heliar - softness at f2 ?

ouhou meven, your first photo is really great. Ok thanks all for the examples. And yes, nzeeman, that's exactly my point: would I see an improvement from my J-3 to an Heliar classic.. From the photos posted here, specially meven's, I would tend to say yes. Seems pretty sharp to me. (artorius, yours is beautiful but don't seem that sharp to me)
 
Cutly said:
ouhou meven, your first photo is really great. Ok thanks all for the examples. And yes, nzeeman, that's exactly my point: would I see an improvement from my J-3 to an Heliar classic.. From the photos posted here, specially meven's, I would tend to say yes. Seems pretty sharp to me. (artorius, yours is beautiful but don't seem that sharp to me)
Click to expand...

i agree f2 photos look excellent. now just to collect those 400$...
also i would love someone to compare jupiter and heliar if anyone have both.
 
I own a Jupiter-8 lens and the J8 is less of a performer than the Heliar when it comes to sharpness and contrast, but it's hard to compare something NEW to something OLD when there is so much variation in old stuff. I can talk about my excellent Yashica 50mm lens and my horrible Pentax SMC 50mm lens and another guy will have an opposite story.

The night I bought my R2A on ebay from a guy, he had the 50 Heliar Classic ending a minute later. I pulled the trigger on it because I wanted one, despite people bashing it.

Why? Because it's DIFFERENT than most 50mm lenses. Noticibly different.

I have all sorts of 50mm lenses from yashica, canon, nikon, pentax, russia, wherever and they all work just dandy. My 50mm f1.4 Yashica lens is probably my best performer and came on a 20 dollar camera.

The Heliar Classic is just cool. The softness wide open and bokeh characteristics make it a great people portrait lens. It sometimes frustrates me when using it to try to make sharp photos of things, but works well for other things.

This was shot at f5.6 yesterday on Fomapan 200 film:
2820790322_0a6ce8b2e0.jpg


This would have been wide open at f2:
2362648089_6842c2e17f.jpg


Probably f2 or f2.8:
2365772112_fe848a0861.jpg



It's a soft, but contrasty lens with smooth bokeh. Sort of a combination not available to me with my other lenses. Some sharp lenses have harsh bokeh.

Pricewise? I paid around 200 dollars for the lens in new condition. And no, it's not for sale ;)
 
Last edited:
Curly, I see nothing to add to what has already been said (or what I already said on Summilux.net) : the Heliar is no Planar or Summicron, but I love it nonetheless. It may even not be as crisp as a good Jupiter 8 can be (I think it has more contrast though). I still love it :eek:)

However, you are Paris, I'm in Paris too. If you want to try the Heliar for a few hours/rolls, just leave me a PM here or at Summilux !
 
adonf said:
Curly, I see nothing to add to what has already been said (or what I already said on Summilux.net) : the Heliar is no Planar or Summicron, but I love it nonetheless. It may even not be as crisp as a good Jupiter 8 can be (I think it has more contrast though). I still love it :eek:)
Click to expand...

it would be very nice if you have time to make 1 or 2 similar photos with jupiter and heliar and to upload them for compare...
 
I might have missed it, but the Heliar f2 also vignettes a bit wide open. Still, I am happy with it for the most part. It is my only RF 50 however so I can't compare it to anything.

Frankly, I like 35mm better on my RFs, so the Heliar doesn't get all that much use.

JCA
 
Tom A said:
The Heliar 50f2.0 is "soft" at f2 and 2.8. That does not mean that it is "unsharp" - it is simply a slight flare and glow that does smooth out wrinkles and lines in portraits.
There is a difference in what is soft focus wise and what is "soft" contrast wise. Very often high contrast lenses will give an appearance of sharpness due to strong " divisions" between dark and bright areas, but still not have particularly high resolution.
The Heliar dates back to a formula that was mostly used for large format cameras (I used to have a 5x7 Graflex with a 300f4.5 Heliar - great portrait lens). In the guise of the 50f2 it is a lower contrast lens, up to about 4-5.6 and then it looks like any other modern 50. It does have a cousin, the 50f3.5 Heliar which is one of the sharpest 50's you can find - but slow.
If I only had one 50, I would probably go for something like the f2 ZM Planar 50 or the aforementioned Hexanon 50/2. The Heliar is a lens you take out to flatter subjects rather than dissect them.
I do have it and I do use it, usually on a M2 with medium speed film (250/400 asa bl/w) and I like it, but then I like virtually all lenses!
Todays technology and skill in glass making has given us a HUGE choice of lenses and I dont think there is a single bad one out there. They might have slightly different "look" to the finished print - but they are all good in their own way!
Click to expand...

Here are a couple of flickr links to pictures of Tom with his 50mm Heliar wide open on my M8.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/streetfusion/2322546406/sizes/o/in/set-72157594496963047/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/streetfusion/2321874479/sizes/o/in/set-72157594496963047/

Best to all. Terry.
 
very nice shots imush. that heliar is best available new lens imho... some people say its soft , some that vignettes but i think it is only compared to modern and aspherical lenses. this lens have beautiful and different look. real rf lens...
 
It sounds like the 50mm Heliar f/2 shares some characteristics with the Zeiss Sonnar 1.5/50. Does anyone have any experience comparing the two lenses? Thoughts on advantages and disadvantages? Tom and Roger, I suspect both of you could contribute some wisdom on this question.
Best,
Larry
 
one question - do i hallucinate or your horizontal photos have more vignetting on left side - especially down left corner?
 
nzeeman said:
one question - do i hallucinate or your horizontal photos have more vignetting on left side - especially down left corner?
Click to expand...

That is possible, I haven't noticed but the vignetting is generated by lightroom, it is not natural vignetting, sometimes when I crop the photos, the vignetting is not applied evenly.
 
I don't find it soft at f2. Took it out for a spin this morning:

2913848100_63290a713f_o.jpg


2913848482_70b54331b2_o.jpg


at ISO640:

2913848946_e05617deb2_o.jpg


2913029085_0ab9d610e5_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom