Here in Radozhiv, a vote was taken for the best Soviet fifty dollars. Its results are shown below.
Voting results for the best Soviet fifty dollars. A total of 11 people voted (image clickable)
A large number of reviews of Soviet optics will find here. Voting for the best Soviet portrait lens (range 85-135) can be found here.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval.
What is a chip?
The same as Lushnikov’s dandelion.
is it needed for canon 1100d? (sorry for the stupid questions)
It depends on you. For more details, see the old Canon lenses section.
Zenitar m 1,7 / 50. My favorite. Pancolar 1,8 / 50 loses to our Soviet lens in the sharpness of the edge of the frame and in the field. In the center they are the same. Helios 44 white is not deflectable from German biotars. This is for sharpness tests. I have a lot of Zeniths and pancolars and 2pcs of biotarches.
If we compare Zenitar 1,7 and Gdrovsky Pankolar of different versions ... then the bokeh of the zenitar is smoother, the design is better mechanically. The diagram does not stick, unlike the Pancolars with their stupid design. Well, with rigorous testing. I understood :) That Zenitars are sharper by 1,7.
Could you tell me if there is a review of the Jupiter-3 lens on your site. Search sites, alas, did not give a result.
With respect, I am.
There is no review of the Jupiter-3 lens on the Radozhiv website yet.
On a full hole, the G-81 noticeably “soapy”. G-44 M39 MMZ 1970 does not have this defect. On G-81, it is undesirable to put Lytkarinsky uncoated light filters due to the sharp increase in parasitic secondary images (PSI). I-50 - I-50-2 is the best in countering work. He completely lacks PVI even under the Lytkarinsky filters.
Make the survey an even better owl. macaroons
Who to include in the vote?
What is there with Helios 103 is there an adapter at all to Nikon or not
This is a rangefinder for Contacts-Kiev, there are no adapters.
Arkady do you think the price tag is more than $ 130 for Helios 81 version of the MS with a dandelion adequate?
I think the price tag is very overpriced.
Hello. There is an opportunity to purchase inexpensively Helios 103. As a sharp high-aperture polynomial, it is very good in its passport characteristics. One catch: can it fit on a Canon EOS400D. I do not know the whole theory about the landing dimensions, etc., but there is nowhere to read about it ... I read that if you put this lens on my camera, it will be like a macro lens (“just a flange (the distance from the thread landing plane to the photoplane) 28,8, 44 mm, while Canon DSLRs have 42 mm, with an adapter for M45,5 - 16,7. That is, it turns out that by screwing such a lens onto a DSLR you get a lens with a built-in macro ring XNUMX mm ”). Is it so?
Everything is just like that. And why do you need this?
This is just to play around.
I hope that an adapter for the Helios 103 53 / 1.8 lens to the EOS system will appear anyway or is it already there? who owns the information on this topic, thank you in advance.
It is unlikely that this is feasible, the working lengths of digital mirrors and rangefinders are incommensurable, the mirror will break. Here on a mirrorless it would be. Once I saw an adapter for Olympus Pen-s on e-Bay, but the price is there ... Somewhere in the net I saw a homemade adapter from raskurochenny Kiev and an adapter from M39 to micro 4/3. In the future, I think to try, there is a donor.
And where Arsat 50 / 2,0 and Arsat 50 / 1,4 are Soviet copies of Nikorrov
Arsat 50 / 2,0 and Arsat 50 / 1,4 are Helios 81 and Helios 123, these are not copies of Nikkorovo.
Arkady say on the mirrorless crop 2.7 what advise? There is an adapter m42-Nikon1.
There are any options on Ali, but it makes sense to order the Meykon standard M39-nikon + dolnomerniki type i61-l or Jupiter-8 with a working length of 28.8mm
This is an adapter
L39-N1 # Aliexpress US $ 3.50 | Camera adapter ring m39 l39 39mm lens mount for nikon1 N1 J1 J2 J3 J4 V1 V2 V3 S1 S2 AW1 mirrorless
https://a.aliexpress.com/_dWjYMMA
I bought myself an MC Helios-77m-4 50mm F1.8, 1991, I was surprised that this lens is very difficult to get, but strangely enough I came across a new copy, a completely new one, the seller said that “echo -90” I went to the stage of alteration under Nikon for infinity, 2-3 hours of torment and the cherished infinity appeared in full))), I wanted to check whether it is so harsh as they write, or is it another Soviet MYTH, for the test I did the following: I put a plastic bottle on the table , I stuck an ordinary sewing needle into the cork, turned my eye to the lens, moved 1,7 meters away, shooting conditions: the evening was rather dim lighting from a 60 W light bulb, I photographed with a flash, immediately from 1,8 then 5,6 from the result I opened my mouth , I enlarged the pictures for years, both pictures are very sharp, and at 1,8 amazing sharpness, of course the background is plastic, but that's what it is for an open hole), I don't know how to whom, but it's quite easy for me to aim, even in low light conditions with a covered diaphragm up to 8. Although I could not immediately to fall into sharpness, out of 10 shots, 2-3 were sharp, and then lo and behold, I turned the sharpness wheel near the viewfinder, adjusted it to my vision and it became easy to aim. My choice MC g-77m-4
Hello. The other day, I have not yet become completely happy owner of the Helios 77m-4, not completely since I have Nikon. You write that you converted it to Nikon with infinity in a couple of hours. Please write how or if you can please give a link to the description of the alteration. I will be very grateful to you.
You write that you converted it to Nikon with infinity in a couple of hours. Please write how or if you can please give a link to the description of the alteration. I will be very grateful to you.
How to remake, can be found in those http://nethunter-photo.blogspot.com/2012/01/77-4.html
But this alteration will not give infinity, at the end you need a finishing touch, you need to twist the rear lens unit a little, about 3-5 turns. Everything is very simple, we twist one turn, put it on the carcass, look in the video finder, I’m doing this on the balcony, I was guided by the roof of the neighboring house, the contrast between the roof of the house and the blue sky helps a lot, and so we twist it until we ideally fall into “infinity”, in the article, they use plates, when they put them under the adapter, I used a cd-disk, grind it a little on sandpaper, and then cut out pieces of the required size, then I used hot melt to remove it, I think you can try ordinary silicone, pay attention when choosing an adapter, it postponed to be lensless-thin, this is very important, you can still use emery for sharpening knives, grind off the bolts so that they ideally go deep and do not scratch the camera mount
Today I bought Helios 81 N .. after my native Nikonovsky Kit 18-55, the most impressive is the RINGING, screaming sharpness not even fully open aperture and ... there is something else in it .. it seems to me "optically" the portrait of a person looks like in life, Kit at different focal points gives different distortions and imbalances of the human face - it is impossible to get used to it. I will leave the whale as a "shirik-landscape", I will use Helios as the main one .. And more .. the green focus button works very precisely !!! So what else is needed? why is it not autofocus?
Good afternoon. There are several options for purchasing fifty dollars. Arsat (helios-81n) for 400 UAH. Zenitar-m 50mm 1,7 for 350 UAH. Helios 44m-6 for 200 UAH and Industar 50-2 for 50 UAH)) What do you recommend?
Now I use Helios 44-2, but I can’t do infinity, but for 70 UAH it’s very good.
Why not Jupiter 3?
Is it possible to consider a priori that everything that relates to the Helios-81N 50mm F2.0 MS applies to the Arsat N 50 mm F2.0 (the new name for the same lens in post-Soviet Ukraine)? I do not mean formal differences, but quality (sharpness, bokeh, etc.)?
Yes, you can.
There was also such a fifty-kopeck "miracle" - ERA-6M 50 / 1.5, but as far as I know, it never went into the serial.
I would choose Jupiter-3 and Zenitar-ME 50 mm f / 1.7 MS (square) from what I have ever held in my hands or sold (and this is all your lenses on the list .. maybe minus 2-3 and plus another ten)
By the way, I don’t understand at all why everyone loves 81-N ... or is everyone shooting on nikon ???
You know, it would be strange if, for example, those who shoot with Canon liked Nikon's glasses, not Canon's.
81 is good because it does not require tweaks, adapters and possible bugs, as is the case with jups and zeniths. That's the whole clue.
"Helios-81" has such bokeh and pattern, at normal sharpness, as if it was created by a GREAT MASTER. You have to feel it.
I am happy that such outstanding lenses as Jupiter-8 and Helios-81 are inexpensive consumer goods for the USSR! This is amazing!
Hello, tell me, is it worth taking another 77m-4 if I have 81N? thanks
no
It is possible to take ms g 81 N. Abrasions of enlightenment are visible on the lens. The seller says that the image quality is not affected. Is it worth taking?
on the shabby area, the contrast may not hold, if wiped it will soap.
This is exactly
Jupiter-8M turn on
So here only mirror optics are voted. And Yu-8, yes. For a rangefinder, it is really unsurpassed from our production. I-22, Yu-8, Helios-103 - that's all you can boast of 28,8 out of 50 mm.