Please note that there are many different versions of the lens named HELIOS-44-2 (or HELIOS-44-2). The lenses were produced in different bodies, at different factories and had many options even among the same version. You can find a general list of them in the section 'A Thousand and One Nights with HELIOS-44'.
As for this review, it shows a lens named HELIOS-44-2 2/58 and serial number 83052779 produced by the Jupiter Optical and Mechanical Plant, Valdai. Judging by the number, the lens was released in 1983. Different versions of HELIOS-44-2 lenses do not differ in principle. In general, HELIOS-44-2 is a common modification / revision of the previous version - HELIOS-44 2 / 58 (names are similar: 44 and 44-2, do not be confused).
Гелиос-44-2 (HELIOS-44-2 2/58)
HELIOS-44-2 2/58 looks like this:
HELIOS-44-2 2/58 has a ring presets aperture. With it, you can select one of the fixed values: F / 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16. Unlike the preset ring, the aperture ring rotates smoothly and with it you can set any intermediate value. The smooth running of the aperture ring is useful when shooting video. The diaphragm consists of 8 petals that form a hole in the form of regular polyhedrons. Unfortunately, the diaphragm blades are poorly blackened.
The focus ring rotates 270 degrees (!), The progress of the ring is smooth. Manual focus is quite convenient. During focusing, the front lens does not rotate, only the frame rim lengthens. HELIOS-44-2 2/58 has a focus distance scale (only in meters) and a depth of field scale for F / 2, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16.
The lens uses simple chemical enlightenment and poorly tolerates side and back light. Also, HELIOS-44-2 2/58 does not have blackened chamfers of lenses, which can adversely affect the contrast of the final image.
Image quality and sample photos
In the center of the image, the lens is sharp enough even at F / 2.0. On covered diaphragms, the edges and corners of the image return to normal. HELIOS-44-2 2/58 is a little yellow. Like other lenses of the HELIOS-44 family, version 44-2 twists the background (legendary 'twisted bokeh' of helios). Such a lens can be a great find for the amateur photographer :).
Source files can download from this link (26 photos in the '.ARW' format, 623 Mb). On camera Sony a7 I used HELIOS-44-2 2/58 with no problem adapter M42-NEX.
UPDATE 1
Examples of photos on Helios-44-2 2/58 and cameras Nikon D5100, D5300 photographer shared with readers of Radozhiva Vladlena Lapshina:
UPDATE 2
Examples of photos on Helios-44-2 2/58 and a camera Canon EOS 60D photographer shared with readers of Radozhiva Andreeva Elena:
UPDATE 3
Examples of photos on Helios-44-2 2/58 and cameras Canon EOS 60D / Canon EOS 5D Makr II a photographer shared with readers of Radozhiva Dmitry Gusalov:
UPDATE 4
Examples of photos on Helios-44-2 2/58 and cameras Nikon D5100 / Nikon D750 photographer shared with readers of Radozhiva Lilia Nemykina:
UPDATE 5
Examples of photos on Helios-44-2 2/58 and a Sony Alpha 7s II camera with readers of Radozhiva shared photographer Ksenia Orlova:
I have been using about 10 lenses HELIOS-44-2 2/58 different manufacturers, the specimens did not differ in any way from each other. For some reason it so happened that this review, which you are reading now, is the most popular of all reviews of the old Soviet optics. This is most likely due to the mass and availability of this lens at flea markets. If you come across a normal Helios-44-2, then it will not be any worse than other lenses in the HELIOS-44 line, which use simple (not 'MC') enlightenment.
Supplement: video review of such a lens - Helios-44 2/58 (KMZ, 8 petals, metal case)can see on my channel here.
Helios-44-2 2/58 (HELIOS-44-2 2/58). Lens shown on camera Sony a7. Attaching the lens to the camera using adapter M42-SONY E NEX.
How to use with modern cameras?
Lenses with mounting thread M42 (M42 X 1 / 45.5), such as the lens from this review, are very easy to use on almost any modern digital camera (both SLR and mirrorless), for this it is enough to choose the right adapter (adapter). You do not need to carry out any additional steps to modify the lens.
The cheapest adapters can be found at Aliexpress.com... There are adapters (adapters) with a chip that provide more convenience during shooting, usually chips are used to confirm focus and / or metering exposure, and form the correct EXIF. The chip does not affect the image quality in any way.
For some SLR cameras (for example, with the Nikon F-mount), you need to use adapters with a corrective lens, which allows you to focus correctly at all focusing distances. For any mirrorless cameras, such a lens is not needed, and the adapter is a simple decorated hollow metal tube with an appropriate mount.
For SLR cameras
- Canon: For cameras Canon EOS with bayonet mount EF / EF-S need an M42-Canon EOS adapter, such an adapter with a chip can be found herewithout chip here.
- NIKON: For cameras Nikon DX / FXas well as for cameras Fujifilm и Kodak with a Nikon F mount, you need an M42-Nikon F adapter, you can buy such an adapter without a lens and a chip here, with a lens without a chip herewith chip without lens here, with lens and chip here. Why a lens? Why chip?
- PENTAX: For Pentax cameras with K mount, you need an M42-Pentax K adapter, you can buy such an adapter here.
- SONY/MINOLTA: For cameras with a Sony / Minolta A mount, you need the M42-Sony A adapter, you can find such an adapter without a chip at this linkwith a chip at this link.
- OLYMPUS/PANASONIC/LEICA: For cameras with a 4/3 bayonet mount (not to be confused with Micro 4/3!) You need an M42-4 / 3 adapter, you can buy such an adapter here.
For mirrorless cameras
- SONY: For cameras with 'E'/'FE' mount series SonyNEX и Sony Alpha you need an adapter M42-Sony E (aka M42-Sony Nex), you can find it at this link. An autofocus adapter is also available for these cameras. Techart PRO Leica M - Sony E Autofocus Adapterwhich can be found at this link.
- OLYMPUS / PANASONIC / KODAK / XIAOMI: For cameras with a bayonet mount Micro 4/3 (Micro 4:3) you need an adapter M42-Micro 4/3, you can find it at this link.
- CANON M: For cameras with Canon EF-M mount need adapter M42-Canon M, it can be found at this link.
- CANON R and RF-S: For cameras with Canon RF mount need adapter M42-Canon R, it can be found at this link.
- Nikon 1: For cameras Nikon 1 Series need adapter M42-Nikon 1, you can find it at this link.
- Nikon Z: For cameras Nikon Z series (FX/DX) need an adapter M42-Nikon Z, it can be found at this link.
- FUJIFILM X: For cameras with mount X need an M42-Fuji X adapter, you can find it at this link.
- FUJIFILM GFX: For medium format cameras G-mount need M42-Fuji GFX adapter, you can find it at this link.
- SAMSUNG: For cameras with NX mount, you need an M42-Samsung NX adapter, you can find it at this link. There are no adapters for the NX mini camera yet.
- PENTAX: For Q-mount cameras, you need an M42-Pentax Q adapter, you can find it at this link.
- SIGMA / PANASONIC / LEICA: For cameras with L mount you need an M42-Leica L adapter, you can find it at this link.
- LEICA: For cameras with a bayonet mount Leica M need adapter M42-L / M, you can find it at this link.
If you have any questions on compatibility and adapters - ask in the comments (comments do not require any registration at all).
Reviews for the Helios-44 2/58 lenses:
- Helios-44 2/58 [KMZ, 13 petals, M39, silver, No. 0220423]
- Helios-44 2/58 [KMZ, 8 petals, M39, silver]
- Helios-44 1: 2 F = 5,8 cm П [KMZ with replaced lenses, No. 0007220, review of the lens from the reader Radozhiva]
- HELIOS-44M 2/58 [KMZ, 8 petals, serial number 7843528]
- HELIOS-44M 2/58 [Jupiter plant, Valdai, 8 petals, serial number 8027170]
- HELIOS-44-2 2/58 [plant 'Jupiter', Valdai, 8 petals, serial number 83052779] + autofocus review
- MS Helios 44-3 2/58 [MMZ, 8 petals, 8619437, 9167912]
- MC Helios-44M-4 2/58
- Helios-44K-4 58mm 1:2 [KMZ, 6 petals, Pentax K]
- MC Helios-44M-4 58mm 1: 2 [plant 'Jupiter', Valdai, 6 petals] + autofocus review
- MC Helios-44M-5 58mm 1: 2 [Jupiter plant, Valdai, 6 petals]
- MC Helios-44M-6 58mm 1: 2 [plant 'Jupiter', Valdai, 6 petals]
- MC Helios-44M-7 58mm 1: 2 [plant 'Jupiter', Valdai, 6 petals]
- An article about most of the major modifications of the Helios-44 series
- Gallery of pictures on MC Helios-44M-4
- Look at modern the lenses 'Helios' can at this link
- A lot of Helios of all varieties can be found on ebay this link
Original 'Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 2/58 ':
- Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 1: 2 f = 5,8cm T [17 diaphragm blades, M42]
- Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 2 / 58 T [12 diaphragm blades, M42]
- A lot of Biotars of all varieties can be found on ebay this link
Look at modern the lenses 'Zenitar' и 'Helios' can at this link.
Results
HELIOS-44-2 2/58 (aka Helios-44-2 2/58) - one of the most common lenses of the Helios-44 series. The mass production of such lenses did not benefit the image quality. The lens can and should be used for any creative ideas. On cropped cameras, it can serve good portrait lens.
Share the review on social networks. If you have any questions about the lens or about compatibility and adapters, ask in the comments (comments do not require any registration at all).
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
good hour.
For some reason, I often come across such a phrase that Helios-44-2 is not famous for its quality, supposedly the lens has a wide variation in quality.
Can someone explain to me what this means?
I have NEVER Helios-44-2 not come across a poor quality.
There is. Maybe everything is fine with the assembly, but the spread in lens quality is large. At what in both directions. I came across a simple 44M, which turned out to be sharper than my 81N, which in turn was sharper than Nikon 50 / 1.8 in the open. Redid it to infinity and gave it to a friend, let it rejoice. 81N is still more convenient on Nikon.
How much has passed through your hands? I have two lenses. One soap (poor sharpness).
Nikon 5100 and Helios 44-2
Picked up yesterday, completely disassembled, removed the oil from the petals, sharp on the open. Before that, it was 44m-4, soaped terribly. So that Helios is different to Helios))
Good afternoon. I want to share a little experience using HELIOS 44-2. I had two of them, now I use one. The first did not give the desired sharpness, although outwardly there were no scratches (disassembled into lenses, except for the lens block) I cleaned. There is no result. As above it was written by the author, in Soviet times there was a race for quantity, not quality. I was lucky with the second copy. There is no clarity, but the photos are good. My personal conclusions: this thing needs to be used for portrait shooting, waist-high shooting, Macro having bought an additional ring. But d For landscape photography, shooting at full height, take other lenses. The bokeh turns out unpredictably, but in the majority it is wonderful (my opinion). I am very pleased with it, using it for its intended purpose.
Will HELIOS 44 fit for still life photography?
It will work if you have the right approach to shooting
Aperture 5,6 - 8, but then you have to shoot from a tripod and close before shooting. And on such a diaphragm, there is no special sense in helios - there is no characteristic pattern, and in terms of convenience and other parameters, the whale will not be worse.
There is no whale, only 35 1.8. If you take HELIOS 44, which version do you prefer for a nikon camera with an adapter without a chip and lens?
I would prefer 81N from Helios to Nikon. And out of 44, probably 13 of the petrol 44-2. The price for them really bends horse.
* petal
13-petal 44. It is a pity there is no way to edit your posts.
On 81n too bend. Infinity is not needed. So I look towards 44. Just try HELIOS.
If you try, then any of 44, the same 44-2, the most inexpensive.
With the lens itself, in addition to screwing the adapter M42-nikon, do not have to be wise?
No
Thank you.
Good evening everyone. I’m renting recently, bought Helios on the advice of a friend. The resulting picture completely suits me, especially for such a ridiculous price. I just didn’t like that there was no infinity. I fixed this problem by removing the alignment ring, but now the hole is always at f2.
A thin ring of sufficient external diameter is provided by the design just to (in addition to adjusting the segment) so that the diaphragm ring does not wedge.
Good day! Due to the loss of the outer cover from this lens, it became necessary to purchase a new one. I understand correctly that in addition to the original one, you can also consider the cover with an internal clip of 49 mm? (Corresponds to the fitting thread under the filter) Thank you in advance for your reply!
It will be even better. You can also order an adapter ring 49-52 mm. And the lid is easier to find, and filters.
Thank you very much for your prompt reply!
Yes. I bought it on Ali ... It works great.
Good evening! Please tell me, if you take the adapter M-42 WITH LENS for this lens (for focusing on the infinity) to Nikon 5300, will the glass of the lens abut against the lens? Like in this video for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7FhwlKnD6Y
Good evening!
Can you please tell me, will everything work on Canon 5d mark II without problems? This means - to cling to the mirror for some focusing distances. I'm really looking forward to your answer, thanks in advance!
Yes, it will work without problems.
Thank you very much for the quick response!
On mark2 it will cling to from a distance of about 8 meters, there will be no infinity. Well, it does not need the principle there over 8 meters. You just need to know that there is such a moment
And who knows, you also need to be careful on 5DM3?
They say sho yes.
Good day. Probably it’s impossible to find a more competent site on lenses, so please do not throw rotten tomatoes, ask a question ...
Which of the lenses available on flea markets and purchase / sale announcement sites is best suited for a homemade USB microscope, whose projects are presented in large numbers on the Internet, in particular on YouTub? What parameters should he have to implement this idea? I'm already confused in all its diversity ... .. Thank you!
This is a rather complicated question that does not have a single answer. Conventional lenses are not suitable for a full-fledged microscope.
Lenses from copiers and other office equipment +/- modern should work. Old photo lenses are of little use. On Avito you can see actually microscopic lenses of the most different quality and price.
helios 44 and sony nex3
good day. I wanted to install Helios 44-2 on a minolta of 600 si, I ordered an adapter from Alik (without a chip) and I put nothing. the camera does not take pictures. with a regular lens fotkaet. what could be the problem?
To unlock and the camera began to work with a manual lens, you need to click on the lens disconnect button and the ISO button and turn on the camera.
I had Helios, soaped, and therefore, for experimental purposes, without any pity, I dispossessed him to the state of a monocle. Since then, when I have a crazy idea to replenish the collection with Helios, I read here this article http://evtifeev.com/8897-gelios-40-2-85-1-5-vs-carl-zeiss-planar-85-1-4-c-y.html/3 And it lets me go, although the article on Helios 40, not 44. Read and understand.
I'm not sure that the attack towards the petzvali is appropriate, since this is a recreated historical optical scheme, and it is in the vintage, in the first place, IMHO that their value consists, plus this is a very niche instrument. And Helios ... well, yes, the bokeh is cool, but this is a different optical scheme, and he must be sharp in the first place. And here swirling bokeh is a consequence of the design feature of another scheme, different from the petzval. As Dmitry Evtifeev noted in his article (reference above), “… a consequence of the introduction of geometric vignetting, which in this case should improve the optical properties of the lens. It's scary to imagine how the lens would work without this little trick of Soviet opticians. "
Therefore, if the author is doing well with Helios, I can only congratulate you on your successful acquisition and wish you creative success. I pass.
The logic of comparison is not quite clear. Helios 40 and Helios 44 are completely different lenses. And although formally both of them are made according to the Planar scheme, they have different purposes and a different picture. 40th - this is something strange, developed because of the high aperture for special applications, along the way found its use in the portrait. The 44th is such an inexpensive staff. Not so bad in itself, quite good for its money and so cheap that it is generally surprising how the question of purchasing it can arise, and even periodic. This is to throw out 300-400 bucks for the 40th you need to think hard (and then refuse, of course). And the 44th, well, honestly ...
Some read, others take pictures
Do I understand correctly that almost all the photos in the augmented albums are the wildest photoshop, and not examples of real photos with at least average post-processing?
It depends on what exactly you mean by the "wildest" Photoshop
Well, at least the fact that your test shots look maybe not the height of photo art, but naturally. And from these eyes cuts. Yes, it’s beautiful, but it’s more like not a photograph, but a picture.
Yes photoshop. The RAW format itself was created raw for subsequent post-processing, that is, initially it says “photographed - processed! Raw file "
Or does it contradict the old rule - I am a photograph without Photoshop. Alas this is a delusion
I would like to ask a question specifically on the topic: I was offered a couple of lens options, of which Helios 44 is a white 13-blade and Industar 61 l / s. I don’t know the condition yet, because it will be possible to evaluate only by images. It seems that both lenses are interesting in their own way. Which one would you recommend as more universal, or what?
44 for 13 petals for creativity is good, 61l / s more for macro and stuff, and it’s a foot darker
I looked at the seller 44M-6 and 44-2. Does it make sense to lean towards one of them specifically, or choose purely in quality?
Maybe I'm wrong, but in my opinion, this is the best lens! Image quality is beyond praise!
Maybe I'm wrong than buying a fifty-fifty Nikkor 50mm 1.8D is better to take Gelika 44-2. Photos are very beautiful in examples.
50 / 1.8D is also good, and autofocus is sometimes much more important than the "artistic" properties of the 44-2.
I heard somewhere: “take off anything on helios - it will be beautiful”. ))
Helios 44m-4 was available but sold (which I regretted), now there is a Helios 44-2 Valdai. I can compare these two lenses. Shooting with Nikon D80. The 44m-4 was not an ordinary MC, in perfect condition, it gave excellent color and not bad sharpness from aperture 2.8. Hel44-2 thought it would not surprise you with anything, but it turned out to be quite sharper (on the open) than 44m-4 and the color is the same - clean, the bokeh is slightly calmer, not as torn as at 44m-4. Sharpness 44-2 with f4 is generally surprising, distant shots are resolved in micro-details, and at f5.6 on crop edge-to-edge sharpness is just such that you don't want to anymore))
I sincerely do not understand a certain hat, in the direction of the fast-moving fifty dollars from metal and glass with a cool pattern, sharpness and color, for the cost of a light filter.
Good hour! Please explain, if Helios 44-2 (rear Jupiter) was created for SLR cameras, does it mean that after installation through the adapter on a mirrorless digital camera there will be any deviations from standard work?
I noticed only one thing that is really inconvenient - the diaphragm pusher does not work, so you have to manually not only focus, but also cover the diaphragm. You can forget about efficiency
On 44-2 there is no pusher, only a preset ring.
Oh, really. I have 44M. With a preset it will be easier
Does the difference in working lengths not matter?
If it is compensated by an adapter, it does not play. The sensor is there and there will be equally distant from the rear lens. Here are examples here on the Sony A7 bzk, everything is fine and without problems.
Tell me on a canon 800d camera if you put Helios 44-2, can I break the mirror?
It literally sticks out at 2 mm at infinity, at 650d set everything was fine on this scared me that I can break now dumb set)
everything will be the same, do not break
Thank you for quick answer)
Place a ring of several (pick) layers of paper between the adapter and the lens until nothing sticks out outside. I installed it on 5DM2 myself
I think you were scared in vain.
Hello!
tell me, on m42 what is the lid suitable for? ... urgently needed, like some kind of yogurt fits
Good day to all. HELIOS 44-2 has recently added to my collection of lenses. Please tell me, I read the comments and heard that you can break glass, and you need to grind something. I have CANON 1200D, a usual adapter without a chip
With your crop, there is nothing to be afraid of.
No problem at 1200d
And what about focusing on 1200d?
I ordered an adapter without a chip and I'm thinking now ...
everything will be okay, only manual focusing, infinity will be