Helios 44-2 versus Helios 44, 44-3, 44M, 44M-4... Which is best? 

I feel they swirl more or less the same, flare, corner sharpness, contrast can be different. I wonder if variations are model to model. I compared 44-2,3, M, M-4 and I do not really see significant differences. 44-3 and 44M-4 seem to have more contrast wide open. But these variations could not be due to condition, inside dust, cleaning marks, coating differences? I find the M series easier to focus and adjust aperture. with 44-2/44-3 it is easy to knock the fous while changing the aperture, especially with gloves. I have to decide what to keep, what to sell. 44M-4 seems the cleaners, 44M-3 smoothest ring but I get some flare lines (maybe some dust inside?), 44-2 has a stiff focus helicoid, 44-3 may be good for filming due to clickless aperture ring (the preset). I ordered a 44M-6. Probably I will just keep 3. While the 44-2 looks cool, the M series are more practical to use.

@@stefpix Hey I have a chance to buy a 44 M6. So Id like to ask how do you like yours ?🤔

thank you sir, sick collection

I enjoyed your video and I agreed with most of it. I own quite a few of these lenses, including the 40, and the original 13 blade 44, as well as a 40-2 and 44m-4. My only disagreement is that I find my 44m-4 has lovely swirls to it, and is one of my favorite lenses. I would use it more, but the focus ring is so stiff that I have a problem with it unscrewing the lens from my adapter. It was so inexpensive, I purchased a second copy in the hopes of smoother focus, but it was equally stiff, perhaps due to caked lubrication.

I use 44-2 lenses quite a bit and have done for years. Across years of manufacturing and across different factories of production they certainly do not swirl in any similar manner. Nor do they visually behave in similar fashion in terms of bokeh, infinity reach, image quality, close focus reach and depth of field across apertures. Use them of different cameras and they behave differently again. And that's just 44-2 lenses. I can only think folks who find not only 44-2 lenses, but many others from the Helios 58mm range, similar is simply because they are using a narrow range on the same camera while suing the same software settings to produce digital images.

@Lucía Santos Eslava hi there. i'm not a film maker so I cannot really advise. I think the 44m4 has better image quality, but both lenses would need to have the aperture rings "de-clicked" if you were filming (i guess?)

Thank you for your kind words, much appreciated.

Me too. :)

What’s model name? Year of release?

the m39 mount 13 blades version is my favourite as well. unfortunately mine doesn't swirl a lot, but it delivers great sharpness and colors. it's my go-to portraits lens

Many thanks. If you can, please let me know your conclusions - I'd be interested in what you think.

Thank you! Much appreciated.

Thank you!

Not for the faint hearted - glad it works!

Thank you for your kind words. Happy hunting!

@@Simonsutak thanks Simon, wanna ask u, some Helios has letters MS (МС), is it better quality indication or something?!

@@Ali.lensman Hi, MC stands for Multi-Coated (glass), and this means the glass should have better flare control and better contrast.

@@Simonsutak Thanks again simon, you absolutely right, МС (многослойного) means multilayered, I just checked it now 😁

I paid so much for canon Fd this year I hate it

Really? I still see offers for 30-70€

@@nk__ it’s usually the worst manufactured one but it’s maybe a little cheaper in Europe 🤷🏻‍♂️

Yes, the click-less aperture is so useful for video.

I bought 44-M thinking is 44-2, is it much difference in the swirl? I'm pretty happy with 44M but now i can't wonder if i'd like the other better.

Are you using a focal reducer?

Yes, that's a good idea - I'll put links to my Flickr albums in the description.

You're welcome!

Many thanks for providing these details on the 44m-4 to 44M-7. The most blatant fake 44M-7s I've seen, as you mention, are those with the 44M a/m switch! I've been trying out a 44M-7 recently (hopefully a genuine one) to see how it compares with the 44M-4. (I'm happy to stick with the 44M-4). On the swirls, yes, I've seen a couple of side by side tests, and they both found the bokeh/swirl is near identical. Quite frankly, I didn't believe these results, it doesn't match my real world experience, nor the experience of others I've read on-line. So I did my own controlled tests, and guess what? The swirls, or more specifically the arrangement of the oval bokeh-balls around the edges, were near identical! However, I still believe, maybe more in delusion, that when I take my earlier, lesser coated and more-bladed Helios lenses out in non-controlled conditions, less favorable conditions, I'm more likely get swirls from the the earlier lenses than the 44M lenses onwards. I've had a similar experience with the early 'parent' Carl Zeiss Biotar T 58/2. My own view is that this lens swirls less than the early Helios 44s. However, in just the right controlled lighting conditions I can get it to swirl a lot...the problem is that this is really an exception not the rule, driven by very favorable conditions and in many other situations it doesn't appear to swirl like a Helios.

@@Simonsutak Fussing too much about the 4/5/6/7 is probably not worth it; as you mentioned, if your main concern is sharpness there are plenty of other better and faster fast-fifties. That's really not the point of this lens.

@@Simonsutak I find differences are more in flare and contrast wide open. Swirls seem very comparable from 44-2, 44-3 MC, 44M, 44M-4 MC. I tried also the Oreston 50, which seems cooler, still with smooth bokeh. At the end the only way to find out is to take the same photo with both lenses, best if on different bodies of the same FF mirrorless camera. Maybe the difference in flare makes you frame and compose in different ways with different Helios lenses. That and the contrast seem the most visible difference. Thank you for your video overviews. At the end you will get the Helios feel with any Helios. number of blades and position of focus ring. handling are important factors. too.

I just bought one and it doesn’t fit on my 44-2 adapter to sony that I have for my other Helios lens. Do you know where I can find the zebra 44-2 adapter ?

Yes, like you, I prefer single or lesser coating lenses. Some of my early lesser coated lenses have a magical combination of sharpness and very dreamy blur, as well as beautiful light/flare effects.

Hi Jon - A question you may be able to answer as you own one. I bought this very model as I liked the heavy build and the fact the greater number of blades would ensure smootlhy formed bokeh circles even at small apertures. My only disappointment was that the markings end up 90 degrees from conventional position when using an M42 to EOS adapter, thus making setting hyperfocal distance a bit awkward - i.e., all the markings for aperture, distance, d-o-f are at the 9 o'clock position! All my other Helios 44's line up just fine. Likewise the Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 58/2 on which the Helios models were based. Seller maintains this is because the original 44 had 39mm threads and adapting these to M42 causes that misaligned appearance. Just curious if this has been your experience when mounting to your Minolta. Many thanks!

Yup, same here.

Thank you. Sounds like a great lens! I'm constantly surprised how good these lenses are - how centre sharp they are, and how good the bokeh is.

Great spot!! It's the beach at West Wittering, looking towards Bracklesham.

Many thanks!

Simon's utak I liked your speed. Normally I watch videos at 1.25x or 1.5x speed, but this was just right for me

Yes, the F 50mm f1.7 is at a different level, and it has AF.

Thank you! Have a quick look here - where I explain how I reversed the front element (glass). ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QMSoPK-ok8Q.html

Thank you! I'm sorry, I've never used these zooms - and I've never seen anyone I know on-line use them either. I'd be interested to see the results.

Thank you!! I've got a 44M-7, and I'm planning to compare it with the Zenitar M 50/1.7, to see how sharp they are.

@@Simonsutak I would like to know your results, qsince I also have a Zenitar-M and wonder about the 44M-7 (and 77M-4 too) 🤔

@@Simonsutak Let me know if Zenitar does not satisfy and you wish to get rid of it :)

Many thanks! These Helios lenses have a M42 screwmount mount. So you'll need an adapter that fits the lens on the f65. Fortunately, adapters for M42 mounts and other camera mounts are quite common. The only exception in my collection is the early chrome Helios 44. and that has a M39 mount. A few lens/camera adapter combinations don't give a focus all the way to infinity, and I'm afraid I don't know whether that is the case with you camera. Have fun!

44M-4 MC and 44-3 MC are qute better at controlling flare.

@@stefpix Thank you Stefano, I'll have to think about giving one of those a shot!

Yes, it is a really good lens, thanks for your comment.

I've tested my own 44-2 lenses and none of them appear to be radioactive. I think it's just a rumour...however, I also have other lenses that are not supposed to be radioactive, but are, so you can never tell 100%.

Hello, glad you like the video. I hope I didn't mislead you! The 44, 44-2 and 44-3 all have click-less apertures. They all have a preset mechanism, with two rings - you set the limits to the aperture movement with one ring, and then the other aperture ring is click-less across all stops up to the limit set by the first ring. So they'd all be good for video. From the Helios 44M onwards, all the lenses have a single clicked mechanism. The 44-2 is probably the best value for money.

Simon's utak Thank you so much for your help! I understood from your video, that the 44 does not have the “clicking” due to an additional mechanism that will create a pre-defined aperture range (which influences a second aperture ring that does not click). Sorry for my previous phrasing. I ‘m sure it sounded unclear. Thank you again! It means the world!

Sometimes. That's my experience - it's not as swirly as the Helios lenses overall, but sometimes, in the right conditions, yes it can swirl. Here's an example: www.flickr.com/photos/95859572@N06/48652054491/in/album-72157649510390487/

If money doesn’t matter, I’d recommend the earliest (lowest serial number) silver Helios 44, M39 13 blades version you can find!

probably the difference is negligible. Probably due to sample variation. If 44M-4 MC it will have better flare control and contrast wide open than the 44-2.

There are so many variations!! Part of the fun of collecting Helios 44 lenses.

That is the transitional body 😊

Oh that doesn't sound good. I don't use Nikon cameras, but a quick search on the internet suggests that it could be the adaptor, and you need to find an adapter that allows infinity focus (with a slight loss of image quality).

I use it on Nikons. The problem is that Nikons have the largest flange distance out of all other DSLR brands so most vintage glass (other than Nikkors) will not give you infinity focus. I have modified my Hellios M42 58mm buy pulling the rear element 2mm back. Gives me infinity focus but you have to be careful as it can hit the mirror while taking pictures. So I focus the lens so that the rear element is away from the mirror and turn on liveview and then take pictures. Again before turning liveview off I move the focus ring take it back to where it was so that it doesnt hit the mirror. You can very easily open the lens, put a thin (1-2mm thick) piece of wire and screw the lens back on. It shud work.

LOL...many thanks for commenting

The 44K-4, the Pentax K mount version of the 44M-4, essentially produces the same results. There are some reviews and fans of this lens on PentaxForums.

The best source for hacks is Retro Foto House. He shows how to keep the pin pushed in...without using super glue!! The 44 and 44-2 don't have the pin issue.

Thank you so much for this, it's really helpful advice. Do you know whether I can simply re-upload this video...or do I need to re-direct people from a link on this screen?

@@Simonsutak you'll have to go back into your video editing software and export the video so it has a higher resolution, and then reupload it to youtube. Itll be a separate video with an entirely separate link. You could delete this or unlist it, or just direct people to the new link in the description of this one. Your videos are pretty good for a newer channel and reminds me a bit of the channel Zenography. You should check him out if you're looking for guidelines on how to model your stuff :)

@@Simonsutak another good resource for russian lenses and history of them is RetroFotoHouse. He repairs sells modifies and maintains old Soviet and German lenses, so he knows a lot and I've learned a bunch from him.

@@GeronimoJak Yes, he's excellent. I stripped down and repaired a very rusty/blades stuck together Yashica Yashinon 5cm f2 after watching his videos - it gave me the courage to do it.

@@GeronimoJak Many thanks for your encouragement. I'll take a closer look at Zenography.

Oh no. Sorry to read this. I've not seen this problem with my versions. You could try asking Retro Foto House on RU-vid. I think he's had experience with all Helios 44s.

Hi, it could be an adapter issue, but more likely it's because there are two versions of this lens. One version (the one I have) is fine for infinity, the other is not. You need to first check whether you have the version with a longer rear mount design that won't focus to infinity (there are articles on the web about the two different versions and what they look like). If you've got a version that should focus to infinity, then its an adapter problem. If not, then look at the modification on this thread - it should help: www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/284609-helios-44-3-mc-58-2-best-kept-secret.html All the best.