This may be one of the best lense reviews I've watched. Excellent work! Your use of the star filter exactly described the bokeh's light warp. Ive never seen anyone attempt this tool! I'm already subscribed and I can only Thumb Up once, so accept my thanks!
There is a corollary in the spikes seen in a amateur astronomy reflecting telescope on bright stars - the supports for the secondary mirror, usually four blades, result in four spikes, you see them in observatory photos of stars. Some folks use other shapes to support the secondary but it just moves the light around, the obstruction is higher than four THIN blades. Three blades unfortunately makes six spikes! Some use two or even one but they have to be thick and they are more difficult to accurately adjust.
One (at least) thing that this comparison lacks is the original CZJ Biotar 58/2 with 40.5 mm filter thread (kit lens from 1947 Contax S SLR). Helios-44 is its full clone (the barrel of the second version with 52 mm filter thread is identical to the first Helios-44 and 44-2) But frankly speaking I found no difference between it and 1980s BelOMO Helios 44-3MC in unusual barrel when I decided to undeservingly pixel-peep both of those (as I own them) using EOS 5DsR (the most unforgiving 35 mm camera at the time). Late Soviet multi-coating offered no benefits to the lack of any kind of coating except 70 years of oxidation. Nuff said.
Many thanks for posting this - very interesting. I learn so much from the feedback and comments on videos. Ironically, an earlier draft of this video included a comparison with my CZJ Biotar 58/2 (the post war Red T, 17 blades version), but I cut it out to save time, and keep the focus on the Helios only.
CZJ Biotar 58/2 is post-war only. I heard some rumours (not that I give them much credibility) that Soviet engineers were closely involved into development of said lens and Contax S. What is definite that that project was closely supervised by the Soviet military - which seems credible enough because at the time lines between civilian and military, when it came to Soviets (specifically Russians) in the eastern part of Germany were quite thin and blurry. Practically, the absolute majority of Soviet civilian photographic lenses were clones of CZJ. Helios = Biotar, Industar = Tessar, Jupiter = Sonnar, Volna = Planar/Makro-Planar. Tair was sort of original development by prof. Volosov, ZM5 and later Rubinar were the original rendition of Schmidt-Cassegren mirror-lens telescope into photographic lenses by Dmitry Maksutov (developed in 1941) and it was the one and only case when not Soviets snatched optical design from Germans or Japanese, but vice versa. Zeiss Mirotar and Leitz Telyt were released later than ZM5. Also Russar/Hydro-Russar was 100% original and it preceded all Biogons and Flektogons by years. Not sure about cross-pollination with Leitz Hektor as those two were too different.
Most excellent study of the swirly character of the Helios 44 iterations, Simon. 👍👍👍This has got to be the very first intelligent RUclips video analysing the various personalities of them and it has answered many of my questions. Your knowledge, time and efforts on making this one is heartily appreciated by yours truly. 🙏
This overview certainly represents the apotheosis of Helios lens reviews. Excellent and intelligent review. Looks like the 42-2 is almost as pleasing as the 44 M39's (my opinion). Excellent - and intelligent - review! Thank you.
Well done Simon! A terrific video that answers questions I've been asking. The next thing I wonder is about copy variation in the old Russian lenses. Maybe not a practical video to make, given the number of 'identical' lenses required, but it would interesting to see what differences a person might find between several lenses of the same version. Perhaps from different factories. This video was great! Keep them coming! By the way, the photo you took of the flowers in the rain was the photo that most influenced me to pursue a Helios 44. What a beautiful photo.
Very little unless the lens was abused or taken apart. I have three Helios lenses. One a mystical 00 serial that is supposed to be magical. All three perform pretty much identically and all three are capable of excellent performance.
Many thanks everyone for your comments and questions. The camera I used for these tests is a Pentax K-1 Full-Frame camera - with a 36MP, 35.9 x 24 mm sensor. I originally included a section at the end of the video showing how the results differed between FF and crop (1.5x) sensors. But I decided to cut out that section, and I'll post another video with those images. Here it is - FF v APS-C: ruclips.net/video/TtvdAJ1MQIg/видео.html
100% would love you to repeat this experiment on APSC (e.g. Pentax KP, K3 etc) - I imagine the swirl would be much less obvious, as it becomes more pronounced at the edge of the frames.
I have a 44M-4 and use it on both a Pentax K3 (crop) and a Sony A7ii (full frame). It takes wonderful images, especially up close, and I find that when I want the most intense swirls, the full frame Sony is better. But for portraits, the crop sensor works just fine and there is enough swirl to set the scene.
After watching this, only one question remains - does Helios-81H swirl the same? (has a native F mount). Heard some claims that it does 🤷♀️ Btw, a fantastic video!
Ok, here's my result of a bottle cap + confetti test with 81H and 44M-6 - 1drv.ms/u/s!AkGSM-dSYoHGgbgh62ntJma-6B-h3w?e=hvVDTR. Overall I found the image on 81H more pleasant, but less swirly (cat eyes are wider).
I have four of those lenses. The 44 (M39) is one of them and I love it. Unfortunately my camera is APS-C (Canon 1300D), so I do not have all the swirl this lenses can give... Excellent video!
Charts and graphs via controlled test are fine for lab technicians, but your testing methodology is most valuable to photographers and those of us who like using these older lenses. Thanks so much .
Fantastic video! I have a Helios 44M-4 which is actually from a family heirloom camera. The body is busted but the lens is in great condition! What I like from your examples is that the 44M-4 just like all the other lenses produces the swirly effect, but because of the coatings on the lens, it simultaneously produces a sharp modern look with great contrast. More motivated than ever to use it!
Simon, I have you to thank/blame for my current obsession with M42 vintage lenses. I have two Helios 44 lenses (a 44-2 and a 44M-4) and it’s good to see that they both produce similar swirly bokeh. Only problem with your many excellent videos is that they make these lenses more sought after, pushing up their prices.
Extremely well done! This should be the first time I've seen someone seriously investigate the swirls. Owning a silver 44 myself I've questioned the mechanism of swirls for months and it is finally been answered. Good job!
For artistic portrait uses, a lot of people forget that these have a bigger image circle than 36x24, so you can tilt them a little, especially on mirrorless cameras!
With Pentax K-1 one can shift the sensor towards all corners and take four pictures to use for one stitched image. It would be nice to see how these lenses behave with this method used.
Thank you for a very informative video. Now that you've confirmed the lack of any real difference, I can sell off 2 and keep my early 13 blade version.
Правильная мысль по поводу контрастности. 44 М-7 с блендой на месте светофильтра дает значительно более контрастную и более закрученную картинку в стоке, чем без бленды.
Thank you, an excellent video and one which has made me think much more about composition and lighting. I think that your conclusions related to the physical aspects of the lens form are most valid. As an old newspaper reporter once said to me when I asked him what did he consider the best camera and lens to use. His reply was: "The one given to me".
Excellent video. Very helpful/informative. Thank you very much for this and all your previous videos. I am a big fan. I have the 44 (M42) and use it on an Olympus OMD 5III. I've had challenges getting a lot of swirly bokeh, probably because of the micro 4/3 two-crop factor. But I do enjoy the lens and still get creative images. Thanks again.
Thank you so much for this video! You had a lot of patience and perseverance to do this analysis. I have a 44-4, unused for about 20 years, it was produced in 1978, I have taken extraordinary photos on film.
The great trick of the Biotar design is that it is a strongly asymmetric "double gauss" (where both parts (front doublet and rear doublet) are different. The doublet in the internal section (from the diaphragm) is smaller, with much more pronounced curves ). Most of the bright "normals" from Japanese brands (50-55-58 f 1.8, 1.4 or 1.2) are based on a more symmetrical gauss design (derived from Xenon or Planar, where both sides of the lens are more similar). Most manufacturers split the 1st doublet in two pieces (like the Xenon design), but the 2nd doublet (inner side of the diaphragm) is more similar to the "detached doublet" on the front. Both sides are more symmetrical than in a Biotar) I recently put my hands on a Nikkor S Auto 5.8cm f1.4, Nikon's first reflex lens with that aperture. (1960-62 approx) Relatively few were manufactured, because a few years later they managed to manufacture the famous S Auto 50 f1.4, which performs much better optically (less distortion and spherical aberration) The thing is that the 5.8cm design is much more like a Biotar (huge front section, reduced rear section with a doublet with steep curvature) It's a strange early attempt of gauss, but very asymmetrical. And as such, in certain circumstances it generates a soft kind of "swirl". The subsequent lenses (50 f1.4 Pre ais, 55 f1,2 pre ais) are "planar" designs, symmetrical gauss, and does not generate that level of swirl Here interesting information, good reading www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/08/lens-geneology-part-1/
Great video, thanks for all of your effort. I own a 44M and I've also shot a 44-2. I have a couple of thoughts for you: 1. Regarding your starburst filter: since that was screwed into your front threads and, as you pointed out, the front elements are recessed further in the earlier designs, I suspect that the difference that you're seeing in the starburst patterns in your images is from vignetting caused by the lens body itself and not the optical design. To really test that theory, you'd need to insert a pattern much closer to the aperture. It may be easy enough to do with the 44M since there is some space between the rear element assembly and the iris. I'd be really curious to see if this makes a difference. 2. I have found that the swirly pattern depends somewhat on where you have the lens focused to. 2m seems to be a sweet spot for my 44M, but I haven't tested this rigorously.
Thank you - I wondered about the impact of the recessed front element, and if I have time I'll try the test you suggest. In terms of the sweet spot, I've also found that 2m is good for my 44s, but for the Helios 40, it's further away, sometimes twice that distance.
Oh, that seems the best and most comprehensive Helios swirlyness test out there! Very nice trick with the star filter A note on contrast though. Seems newer models (M6/7) had lesser contrast not by accident. They are produced on Valday optical plant, but (as was always considered) the best ones are from Krasnogorsk (KMZ). By the logos it seems all the others (aside from black 44 and 44-3 which are BelOMO) are KMZ. That's why they are better. Also I'm much surprised M6 and 7 are good! They are from 90s, when it all had fallen apart in Russia, so production was cheapened. So I personally stayed away from them, despite wanted to get one just because of how they look. Nice to know they are good too!
I've recently acquired a 44M-4 made at the Valdai factory, so I'll be able to see how it much it differs from my other 44M-4 made at KMZ. Apparently, the Helios 44M-7 were selected as the best quality out of the lens production, while the less good lenses were labelled 5 or 6. (I'm not sure this is 100% true, perhaps someone can confirm this). My 6 and 7 are solid lenses, with good optics, but both suffer from stiff focus rings - caused by the helicoid grease used..
thanks, Simon. Great to see an objective test rather than the speculative comments I have seen in other places this is really an excellent video, of vintage lens nerds like me.
Woo. Love the swirl on demand set up! Wonder if a narrow hood would affect the star filter(great tool btw) Helios coating are quite different even among lenses of the same generation/model.
Talking about how bleak it is when you filmed in midwinter... proceeds to show a beautiful flower. You certainly have different winters than the ones I get! Great video nonetheless, super informative and a fun watch!
The "Footballs" are caused by astigmatism in the lens. The bright edges of the Footballs- over-correction for spherical aberration. Lenses that are highly corrected for field curvature typically have football shaped Bokeh Balls, more elongated towards the edge of the frame. The Leica Summarit 5cm F1.5 is known for its Summarit Swirlies.
Very interesting, Simon. The Helios 44 lenses are great lenses. True classics like the Tessar 50s. I've had four of them, two 44 M-4s, a 44 M-6, and a 44-3. Each seems to have its own character. When I downsized my collection, I kept the sharper of the 44 M-4s and the 44-3, and after watching this I guess I might be shooting with them this week. I have to say that I don't much care for swirly bokeh preferring the creamy type myself. Thanks for making these videos. Modern autofocus lenses can produce good images, but the older manual focus lenses are very special as your pictures attest.
Thank you for your videos, I learn a lot from them. Objective and judicious, you correctly evaluate subjective characteristics, which helps a lot who wants more information about vintage lenses. Do you plan to make a video about 55mm f1.2 yashinon (tomioka)? Thanks!
the most beautiful and most complete review I've found here on RUclips. Thanks for these test differences, I own a 44m, the only one I've found. when I took it I thought I hadn't taken the best that existed but I settled for it. I'm much more confident now. thank you
Thank you! I used a printer to make the filter in the video. I'm fortunate to have access to a printer that can print onto thick objects. However, you can make the shape using paper, if you're patient enough to cut out the shape. I posted a video on this some time ago: ruclips.net/video/O6AuYf4ndKQ/видео.html
from what ive learned your dates are off....the silver 44(M39) has the logo from the KMZ factory that began in 1970 with the solid tipped arrow. (not the arrow with two lines from the 1949 KMZ factory...but my eyes might be seeing wrong... the 44M & 44M-4 were the later KMZ 1993 factory, (the logo being just lines not arrow.... the 44 (M42) 44-3 the cheaper later made MMZ factory with the round upside down smile..., the 44-2 44M6 & 44m7 also cheaper made later Valdai factory with the circle and arrow.
I recently acquired a Helios 44-2. I'm told there is also a difference between factories that made them just to add to the confusion. Regardless, I've been happy with mine and will be adding to the collection. Edit: tried and tried but I cannot get swirls from this lens.
The swirls are directly linked to Communist growth in USSR, during height of Stalin the swirls were magnificent and beautiful essentuating the peak of Communist development. But during the Gorbachev era, we see a decrease in swirl characteristics, the lenses are clearly showing a sadness, a growing depression with a hint of self destructiveness. And finally, the 90s Helios, this is where we see the true characteristics of depression in swirl, these lenses have swirls that give strong smell of alcohol, gunpowder and complete lack of life goals. So its in my conclusion the Helios preferred the age of true Communism, and less during the age of Capitalism, its our duty to bring back Communism so that Helios can swirl better.
Another very interesting video Simon. I've always been put off considering the older versions of the lens as I wanted the swirl effect. This shows that in the correct conditions any version can produce similar results.
Stumbled over your review which helped me to narrow down my choice, so I found a 44-3 (MMZ) yesterday for a good price and since you got me attentive to what to look for, I bought it. First tests and yeah, you are right. Thanks. I don't know if I will buy other copies, but at least I know before I buy.
Great video! Thank you for the effort to put your Helios 44 collection through the paces. I guess I have to dust off my own Helios 44 collection (at least 9 lenses, probably 10) and use these more often again, especially for catching their swirly bokeh. Interestingly I own the same lenses which you tested but the 44 I have in two silver versions, one with 8 blades and one with 13 blades. When I was building my collection I left out the 44M-5 since it doesn't have any specific relevance compared with the 44M-4 (same resolution of 41/20 lp/mm). The lenses which I was using most (in the past) were the 44M-7 and the 44M-4 which are both producing beautiful pictures straight out of the camera (Sony A7 and Sony A7R III). By buying an old Sony A7, a Helios 44 variant (58mm) and a MIR-1B (37mm) everyone can (technically seen) start to shoot great looking full-frame vintage prime lens pictures with a relatively small investment.
I truly appreciate your effort in preparing this and all of your videos. I have spent a few cold Saturday afternoons testing sharpness and ISO of the cameras and lenses I have collected. It does take a lot of work to perform then organize the data. I have a 44m that I have only used a few times. A side note that you may want to warn your subscribers about is finding a good M42 to Pentax K adapter. Until I purchased an original Pentax adapter I thought my M42 lenses were all soft while used for landscape photography. It turns out the 2 Chinese made adapters I had purchased are too thick causing the lenses to not focus to infinity. Cheers, from a subscriber who lives near Chicago.
Many thanks for your kind words. Guess we both live in climates where testing cameras and lenses is a fun activity in the winter!! (Although I'd welcome more sunlight). And you've so right about the benefits of using an original Pentax adapter.
Great to see how all these iterations render swirly bokeh, especially the influences of coatings and lens barrel differences. That was certainly unexpected!
Good timing. I just got given a 44M a few days back. So far loving the thing. Definitely major swirl going on. Very clear and pronounced. I've not purposefully tried to make it swirl, either. Impossible to actually see the swirls through the viewfinder of my particular camera. and the screen on the back is tiny and low res. So I only get to see it when I get back home. For how little these lenses go for, particularly the earlier models, it's madness not to have at least one. I've been eying an M-7 for a while, too. From what I've seen others make with one, it looks incredible. Sharper than it has any right to be. =D That alone seems like a huge difference to the earlier unnumbered M. This thing loves the softness. Makes for some incredible portraiture. and with the swirls, they really just halo your subject nicely.
Yes, I've just acquired a second 44M-4 and took it out for a walk today, expecting it to be as centre-sharp as the 44M-7 I've been using recently...but it's not!!
Tough call! Assuming they are in the same condition...and similar price...I'd probably go for the 44M as I like using the A/M switch with the lens to quickly try open and then stopped down shots. But optically/coatings-wise, the 44M-6 might be a slightly better lens. I'm not an expert on factory variations.
worth knowing there are different versions of 44-2s, depending on which icon or symbol is on the lens you can tell if it was built with cheaper materials
I recently had several helios, not as many as your test. I needed to downscale. The final 2 after my testings was the 44-2 and the older 44 m39 silver. the best for sharpness?. I sold the rest of lenses and kept the 44 silver
@8.24 the colour rendering between the m39 and the m7 are worlds apart. The M39 seems so much warmer. I have both the M39 and 44-2 and bokeh is the same. Thanks for this very helpful study
Thank you. Yes, I am a Chiswicker! Good to hear from you. For many years I walked through Chiswick House grounds each day on my way to work, as you can see from my photos....Cheers, Simon
I have 44-3. It is mc and has lots of blades. Gee, photographers have so many choices. Are we ever satisfied? I always use a lens hood. I also have the Biotar, which I have not yet tested. Thank you for this video.
Another excellent and technically informative video. You went to a lot of time and effort to test and report on all the lenses. If one lens had been the clear winner, then I guess that we would all rush out to purchase that version. So good to know that they are very similar. My first Helios was a 44M and unbeknown to me had the front element reversed. So purchased a second Helios last year, the early silver 44 with 13 blades. Had to be serviced because of the stiff focusing. Wonderful swirls and was surprised with the saturated colors. Also the internal flare can really add to the mood of some images.
They are all the same formula, so it seems logic that they have similar character. You should measure the image circle. This could explain why there are some differences with the star filter.
I appreciate this asI am looking for a Helios lens at the moment and I feel that this essentially gives me a little more leeway to go with a tighter budget and get more or less a clean example at the best price without worrying too much about getting a specific one. It will be nice in time to expand upon that, but for now, that's where I will stand.
This may be one of the best lense reviews I've watched.
Excellent work!
Your use of the star filter exactly described the bokeh's light warp. Ive never seen anyone attempt this tool!
I'm already subscribed and I can only Thumb Up once, so accept my thanks!
Thank you so much!
There is a corollary in the spikes seen in a amateur astronomy reflecting telescope on bright stars - the supports for the secondary mirror, usually four blades, result in four spikes, you see them in observatory photos of stars. Some folks use other shapes to support the secondary but it just moves the light around, the obstruction is higher than four THIN blades. Three blades unfortunately makes six spikes! Some use two or even one but they have to be thick and they are more difficult to accurately adjust.
An excellent, very well thought out and produced comparison. Thank you.
One (at least) thing that this comparison lacks is the original CZJ Biotar 58/2 with 40.5 mm filter thread (kit lens from 1947 Contax S SLR). Helios-44 is its full clone (the barrel of the second version with 52 mm filter thread is identical to the first Helios-44 and 44-2)
But frankly speaking I found no difference between it and 1980s BelOMO Helios 44-3MC in unusual barrel when I decided to undeservingly pixel-peep both of those (as I own them) using EOS 5DsR (the most unforgiving 35 mm camera at the time). Late Soviet multi-coating offered no benefits to the lack of any kind of coating except 70 years of oxidation. Nuff said.
Many thanks for posting this - very interesting. I learn so much from the feedback and comments on videos. Ironically, an earlier draft of this video included a comparison with my CZJ Biotar 58/2 (the post war Red T, 17 blades version), but I cut it out to save time, and keep the focus on the Helios only.
CZJ Biotar 58/2 is post-war only. I heard some rumours (not that I give them much credibility) that Soviet engineers were closely involved into development of said lens and Contax S. What is definite that that project was closely supervised by the Soviet military - which seems credible enough because at the time lines between civilian and military, when it came to Soviets (specifically Russians) in the eastern part of Germany were quite thin and blurry.
Practically, the absolute majority of Soviet civilian photographic lenses were clones of CZJ. Helios = Biotar, Industar = Tessar, Jupiter = Sonnar, Volna = Planar/Makro-Planar. Tair was sort of original development by prof. Volosov, ZM5 and later Rubinar were the original rendition of Schmidt-Cassegren mirror-lens telescope into photographic lenses by Dmitry Maksutov (developed in 1941) and it was the one and only case when not Soviets snatched optical design from Germans or Japanese, but vice versa. Zeiss Mirotar and Leitz Telyt were released later than ZM5.
Also Russar/Hydro-Russar was 100% original and it preceded all Biogons and Flektogons by years. Not sure about cross-pollination with Leitz Hektor as those two were too different.
Most excellent study of the swirly character of the Helios 44 iterations, Simon. 👍👍👍This has got to be the very first intelligent RUclips video analysing the various personalities of them and it has answered many of my questions. Your knowledge, time and efforts on making this one is heartily appreciated by yours truly. 🙏
Many thanks for your kind words.
This overview certainly represents the apotheosis of Helios lens reviews. Excellent and intelligent review. Looks like the 42-2 is almost as pleasing as the 44 M39's (my opinion). Excellent - and intelligent - review! Thank you.
Well done Simon! A terrific video that answers questions I've been asking. The next thing I wonder is about copy variation in the old Russian lenses. Maybe not a practical video to make, given the number of 'identical' lenses required, but it would interesting to see what differences a person might find between several lenses of the same version. Perhaps from different factories. This video was great! Keep them coming! By the way, the photo you took of the flowers in the rain was the photo that most influenced me to pursue a Helios 44. What a beautiful photo.
Very little unless the lens was abused or taken apart. I have three Helios lenses. One a mystical 00 serial that is supposed to be magical. All three perform pretty much identically and all three are capable of excellent performance.
This video may answer your questions: ruclips.net/video/mV3MSfl-NYI/видео.html
@@HaraldEngels Thanks for the recommendation. That was a great video!
@@trinityharbour7054 это не русский обьектив!а советский!
Simon
Thanks for the review I've been wanting to get one of theses lenses for awhile now I have a better idea which one I want to get
Many thanks everyone for your comments and questions. The camera I used for these tests is a Pentax K-1 Full-Frame camera - with a 36MP, 35.9 x 24 mm sensor. I originally included a section at the end of the video showing how the results differed between FF and crop (1.5x) sensors. But I decided to cut out that section, and I'll post another video with those images.
Here it is - FF v APS-C: ruclips.net/video/TtvdAJ1MQIg/видео.html
Definitely looking forward to it, Simon. Enquiring minds want to know how much the swirls are reduced on a 1.5x crop sensor. 🙏
Is the Helios bokeh considered to be buttery smooth, or busy and harsh? It's a bit hard to rate due to it's swirly bokeh in certain conditions.
100% would love you to repeat this experiment on APSC (e.g. Pentax KP, K3 etc) - I imagine the swirl would be much less obvious, as it becomes more pronounced at the edge of the frames.
I have a 44M-4 and use it on both a Pentax K3 (crop) and a Sony A7ii (full frame). It takes wonderful images, especially up close, and I find that when I want the most intense swirls, the full frame Sony is better. But for portraits, the crop sensor works just fine and there is enough swirl to set the scene.
@@wreford07 or perhaps just a short synopsis on the differences when used on APS -C .
After watching this, only one question remains - does Helios-81H swirl the same? (has a native F mount). Heard some claims that it does 🤷♀️ Btw, a fantastic video!
Ok, here's my result of a bottle cap + confetti test with 81H and 44M-6 - 1drv.ms/u/s!AkGSM-dSYoHGgbgh62ntJma-6B-h3w?e=hvVDTR. Overall I found the image on 81H more pleasant, but less swirly (cat eyes are wider).
I have four of those lenses. The 44 (M39) is one of them and I love it. Unfortunately my camera is APS-C (Canon 1300D), so I do not have all the swirl this lenses can give... Excellent video!
Buy a speed booster
Charts and graphs via controlled test are fine for lab technicians, but your testing methodology is most valuable to photographers and those of us who like using these older lenses. Thanks so much .
Thank you!
the best Helios video, I have the 44-3 paired with 2X anamorphic and looks great, at least for me.
Fantastic video! I have a Helios 44M-4 which is actually from a family heirloom camera. The body is busted but the lens is in great condition! What I like from your examples is that the 44M-4 just like all the other lenses produces the swirly effect, but because of the coatings on the lens, it simultaneously produces a sharp modern look with great contrast. More motivated than ever to use it!
Also do you think you could recommend a close focus swirly lens? I like to photograph little mushrooms and that swirl is a great effect with those
Very informational, thank you love you :)
Really interesting analysis.I have both the helios 44-2 and the SMC Tak 55/1.8 so seeing this contrast was fascinating.
after your videos i decided to buy 44m-4 and it is very good lens :)
Simon, I have you to thank/blame for my current obsession with M42 vintage lenses. I have two Helios 44 lenses (a 44-2 and a 44M-4) and it’s good to see that they both produce similar swirly bokeh. Only problem with your many excellent videos is that they make these lenses more sought after, pushing up their prices.
Extremely well done! This should be the first time I've seen someone seriously investigate the swirls. Owning a silver 44 myself I've questioned the mechanism of swirls for months and it is finally been answered. Good job!
For artistic portrait uses, a lot of people forget that these have a bigger image circle than 36x24, so you can tilt them a little, especially on mirrorless cameras!
With Pentax K-1 one can shift the sensor towards all corners and take four pictures to use for one stitched image. It would be nice to see how these lenses behave with this method used.
Late to the party, but a real nice video Sir !
I really enjoyed watching it
I'm getting a Helios and going for a 44-2
Great! I have been wondering about this for MANY years. Glad to see my 44-3 MC is not a poor performer. I personally love it 👍
Estou completamente admirado com o nível de detalhamento desse vídeo, parabéns pelo empenho. Parabéns 👏👏👏
Impressão minha ou não fala sobre 44M 5?
@@kleveroliveira3769 não fala mesmo, e eu logo comprei uma ontem antes de ver esse vídeo 😔
tomara que faça pelo menos um pouco de redemoinho
@@kevinkaleski205 ele mencionou no outro vídeo sobre as versões que ele não tem, mas que pelo que já testou é a pior de todas kkkkk que parada
Que buen trabajo. Te lo agradezco, es una buena tesis y muy bien argumentada. Gran aporte, saludos desde Chile.
Nice review! Now I want to go outside and play with my 44M which I haven't used for ages. I also have a tilt adapter for it which can add to the fun 😊
Thank you for making this video. just what i need.
Love your approach! You ask the question, do experiments, and then come up with the answer supported by evidence
i have one adapted on apsc and swirls are pretty weak opposing to ff on my friends camera 😢
Thank you for a very informative video. Now that you've confirmed the lack of any real difference, I can sell off 2 and keep my early 13 blade version.
I'm always waiting your video simon 😍😍
Thank you SIMON, Good stuff
Правильная мысль по поводу контрастности. 44 М-7 с блендой на месте светофильтра дает значительно более контрастную и более закрученную картинку в стоке, чем без бленды.
Спасибо!
Thank you! The best comparison video for this lens❤
Very relaxing experience. Like to see some nighttime traffic work.
Thank you, an excellent video and one which has made me think much more about composition and lighting.
I think that your conclusions related to the physical aspects of the lens form are most valid.
As an old newspaper reporter once said to me when I asked him what did he consider the best camera and lens to use. His reply was: "The one given to me".
Very useful, thanks! Keeping my 44M-4 :-)
I guess value for money...44-2! Thank You!
Great video! This was very very useful!
Incredible investigative work, thank you so much for your time, effort and dedication in making this comprehensive deep-dive
Excellent video. Very helpful/informative. Thank you very much for this and all your previous videos. I am a big fan. I have the 44 (M42) and use it on an Olympus OMD 5III. I've had challenges getting a lot of swirly bokeh, probably because of the micro 4/3 two-crop factor. But I do enjoy the lens and still get creative images. Thanks again.
Thank you so much for this video! You had a lot of patience and perseverance to do this analysis.
I have a 44-4, unused for about 20 years, it was produced in 1978, I have taken extraordinary photos on film.
Excellent video! Well done. Finally, I understood I swirls are created ... Many thanks.
Very informative and illustrating video - and good work, Thanx!
The great trick of the Biotar design is that it is a strongly asymmetric "double gauss" (where both parts (front doublet and rear doublet) are different. The doublet in the internal section (from the diaphragm) is smaller, with much more pronounced curves ).
Most of the bright "normals" from Japanese brands (50-55-58 f 1.8, 1.4 or 1.2) are based on a more symmetrical gauss design (derived from Xenon or Planar, where both sides of the lens are more similar).
Most manufacturers split the 1st doublet in two pieces (like the Xenon design), but the 2nd doublet (inner side of the diaphragm) is more similar to the "detached doublet" on the front. Both sides are more symmetrical than in a Biotar)
I recently put my hands on a Nikkor S Auto 5.8cm f1.4, Nikon's first reflex lens with that aperture. (1960-62 approx) Relatively few were manufactured, because a few years later they managed to manufacture the famous S Auto 50 f1.4, which performs much better optically (less distortion and spherical aberration) The thing is that the 5.8cm design is much more like a Biotar (huge front section, reduced rear section with a doublet with steep curvature) It's a strange early attempt of gauss, but very asymmetrical. And as such, in certain circumstances it generates a soft kind of "swirl". The subsequent lenses (50 f1.4 Pre ais, 55 f1,2 pre ais) are "planar" designs, symmetrical gauss, and does not generate that level of swirl
Here interesting information, good reading
www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/08/lens-geneology-part-1/
Great video, thanks for all of your effort. I own a 44M and I've also shot a 44-2. I have a couple of thoughts for you:
1. Regarding your starburst filter: since that was screwed into your front threads and, as you pointed out, the front elements are recessed further in the earlier designs, I suspect that the difference that you're seeing in the starburst patterns in your images is from vignetting caused by the lens body itself and not the optical design. To really test that theory, you'd need to insert a pattern much closer to the aperture. It may be easy enough to do with the 44M since there is some space between the rear element assembly and the iris. I'd be really curious to see if this makes a difference.
2. I have found that the swirly pattern depends somewhat on where you have the lens focused to. 2m seems to be a sweet spot for my 44M, but I haven't tested this rigorously.
Thank you - I wondered about the impact of the recessed front element, and if I have time I'll try the test you suggest. In terms of the sweet spot, I've also found that 2m is good for my 44s, but for the Helios 40, it's further away, sometimes twice that distance.
That was extremely well done and interesting.
Oh, that seems the best and most comprehensive Helios swirlyness test out there! Very nice trick with the star filter
A note on contrast though. Seems newer models (M6/7) had lesser contrast not by accident. They are produced on Valday optical plant, but (as was always considered) the best ones are from Krasnogorsk (KMZ).
By the logos it seems all the others (aside from black 44 and 44-3 which are BelOMO) are KMZ. That's why they are better.
Also I'm much surprised M6 and 7 are good! They are from 90s, when it all had fallen apart in Russia, so production was cheapened. So I personally stayed away from them, despite wanted to get one just because of how they look. Nice to know they are good too!
I've recently acquired a 44M-4 made at the Valdai factory, so I'll be able to see how it much it differs from my other 44M-4 made at KMZ. Apparently, the Helios 44M-7 were selected as the best quality out of the lens production, while the less good lenses were labelled 5 or 6. (I'm not sure this is 100% true, perhaps someone can confirm this). My 6 and 7 are solid lenses, with good optics, but both suffer from stiff focus rings - caused by the helicoid grease used..
thanks, Simon. Great to see an objective test rather than the speculative comments I have seen in other places this is really an excellent video, of vintage lens nerds like me.
Woo. Love the swirl on demand set up! Wonder if a narrow hood would affect the star filter(great tool btw)
Helios coating are quite different even among lenses of the same generation/model.
Brilliant and comprehensive.. thank you so much!
Thank you for this video!
AWESOME Dude, If you are looking for a Helios lens, You have come to the right chanell....Brilliant Video along with the best information out there...
Great video. Many thanks for your effort! Good to know that every version is basically the same. Thanks :)
Talking about how bleak it is when you filmed in midwinter... proceeds to show a beautiful flower. You certainly have different winters than the ones I get! Great video nonetheless, super informative and a fun watch!
Yes, our winters are mild, but dark and damp.
The "Footballs" are caused by astigmatism in the lens. The bright edges of the Footballs- over-correction for spherical aberration. Lenses that are highly corrected for field curvature typically have football shaped Bokeh Balls, more elongated towards the edge of the frame. The Leica Summarit 5cm F1.5 is known for its Summarit Swirlies.
It took me a while to find, but sir Simon..... You gave me the answers that I needed.
Very interesting, thanks for doing this test!
Very interesting, Simon. The Helios 44 lenses are great lenses. True classics like the Tessar 50s. I've had four of them, two 44 M-4s, a 44 M-6, and a 44-3. Each seems to have its own character. When I downsized my collection, I kept the sharper of the 44 M-4s and the 44-3, and after watching this I guess I might be shooting with them this week. I have to say that I don't much care for swirly bokeh preferring the creamy type myself. Thanks for making these videos. Modern autofocus lenses can produce good images, but the older manual focus lenses are very special as your pictures attest.
Thank you for your videos, I learn a lot from them. Objective and judicious, you correctly evaluate subjective characteristics, which helps a lot who wants more information about vintage lenses. Do you plan to make a video about 55mm f1.2 yashinon (tomioka)?
Thanks!
Many thanks - yes, I'll be doing a review of my Tomioka Auto Revuenon 55mm f.2.
fantastic comparison!
Glad you enjoyed it.
Excellent. I found online a literally new 44-3 and was wondering if it swirls.
look at 8:02 and 14:55
Excellent study! The starburst demonstration was particularly educational!
the most beautiful and most complete review I've found here on RUclips. Thanks for these test differences, I own a 44m, the only one I've found. when I took it I thought I hadn't taken the best that existed but I settled for it. I'm much more confident now. thank you
What an awesome video. The amount of work behind is immense! Thank you! Could you please make a tutorial on how to make that starry filter?
Thank you! I used a printer to make the filter in the video. I'm fortunate to have access to a printer that can print onto thick objects. However, you can make the shape using paper, if you're patient enough to cut out the shape. I posted a video on this some time ago: ruclips.net/video/O6AuYf4ndKQ/видео.html
from what ive learned your dates are off....the silver 44(M39) has the logo from the KMZ factory that began in 1970 with the solid tipped arrow. (not the arrow with two lines from the 1949 KMZ factory...but my eyes might be seeing wrong... the 44M & 44M-4 were the later KMZ 1993 factory, (the logo being just lines not arrow.... the 44 (M42) 44-3 the cheaper later made MMZ factory with the round upside down smile..., the 44-2 44M6 & 44m7 also cheaper made later Valdai factory with the circle and arrow.
Wonderful study, thank you so much for posting !
Incredible video! Thank you.
Excellent and super informative. Thank you for taking the time to create and share this.
I recently acquired a Helios 44-2. I'm told there is also a difference between factories that made them just to add to the confusion. Regardless, I've been happy with mine and will be adding to the collection. Edit: tried and tried but I cannot get swirls from this lens.
you cant get swirls??? was thinking of buying one but im scared thisll happen...
Many thanks to the author of the video! For years I wondered about the same questions that are finally answered in this video. Kudos for your work!
The swirls are directly linked to Communist growth in USSR, during height of Stalin the swirls were magnificent and beautiful essentuating the peak of Communist development.
But during the Gorbachev era, we see a decrease in swirl characteristics, the lenses are clearly showing a sadness, a growing depression with a hint of self destructiveness.
And finally, the 90s Helios, this is where we see the true characteristics of depression in swirl, these lenses have swirls that give strong smell of alcohol, gunpowder and complete lack of life goals.
So its in my conclusion the Helios preferred the age of true Communism, and less during the age of Capitalism, its our duty to bring back Communism so that Helios can swirl better.
Helios Bokeh Tutorial Nr.1. on RUclips! Thank you! 👍
What a marvellous work for those who love the vintage, especially the cheapo Russian lenses 😊
Detail to describe and analyse these helios lenses versions, thank you!
fantastic comparison, a joy to watch
So thorough and professional, thank you!!
Another very interesting video Simon. I've always been put off considering the older versions of the lens as I wanted the swirl effect. This shows that in the correct conditions any version can produce similar results.
Stumbled over your review which helped me to narrow down my choice, so I found a 44-3 (MMZ) yesterday for a good price and since you got me attentive to what to look for, I bought it. First tests and yeah, you are right. Thanks. I don't know if I will buy other copies, but at least I know before I buy.
Great video! Thank you for the effort to put your Helios 44 collection through the paces. I guess I have to dust off my own Helios 44 collection (at least 9 lenses, probably 10) and use these more often again, especially for catching their swirly bokeh. Interestingly I own the same lenses which you tested but the 44 I have in two silver versions, one with 8 blades and one with 13 blades. When I was building my collection I left out the 44M-5 since it doesn't have any specific relevance compared with the 44M-4 (same resolution of 41/20 lp/mm). The lenses which I was using most (in the past) were the 44M-7 and the 44M-4 which are both producing beautiful pictures straight out of the camera (Sony A7 and Sony A7R III). By buying an old Sony A7, a Helios 44 variant (58mm) and a MIR-1B (37mm) everyone can (technically seen) start to shoot great looking full-frame vintage prime lens pictures with a relatively small investment.
Thank you! We clearly share very similar experiences - except that I've never taken the plunge with a MIR-1B!
Is it only me or somebody else also see that 44M-7 has more color vibrancy?
I truly appreciate your effort in preparing this and all of your videos. I have spent a few cold Saturday afternoons testing sharpness and ISO of the cameras and lenses I have collected. It does take a lot of work to perform then organize the data. I have a 44m that I have only used a few times. A side note that you may want to warn your subscribers about is finding a good M42 to Pentax K adapter. Until I purchased an original Pentax adapter I thought my M42 lenses were all soft while used for landscape photography. It turns out the 2 Chinese made adapters I had purchased are too thick causing the lenses to not focus to infinity. Cheers, from a subscriber who lives near Chicago.
Many thanks for your kind words. Guess we both live in climates where testing cameras and lenses is a fun activity in the winter!! (Although I'd welcome more sunlight). And you've so right about the benefits of using an original Pentax adapter.
Great to see how all these iterations render swirly bokeh, especially the influences of coatings and lens barrel differences. That was certainly unexpected!
Cool! Maybe getting a hood for the 44M4-7 would improve the contrast and bring them closer to the earlier 44's.
Yes, a deep hood, rather than a more 'conventional' hood.
Good timing. I just got given a 44M a few days back. So far loving the thing. Definitely major swirl going on. Very clear and pronounced. I've not purposefully tried to make it swirl, either. Impossible to actually see the swirls through the viewfinder of my particular camera. and the screen on the back is tiny and low res. So I only get to see it when I get back home. For how little these lenses go for, particularly the earlier models, it's madness not to have at least one. I've been eying an M-7 for a while, too. From what I've seen others make with one, it looks incredible. Sharper than it has any right to be. =D That alone seems like a huge difference to the earlier unnumbered M. This thing loves the softness. Makes for some incredible portraiture. and with the swirls, they really just halo your subject nicely.
Yes, I've just acquired a second 44M-4 and took it out for a walk today, expecting it to be as centre-sharp as the 44M-7 I've been using recently...but it's not!!
Amazing video! Thank you for the extensive tests! 👌🏻
44M from KMZ from 1981 or Valdai 44M-6 from 92?
What do you think?
Tough call! Assuming they are in the same condition...and similar price...I'd probably go for the 44M as I like using the A/M switch with the lens to quickly try open and then stopped down shots. But optically/coatings-wise, the 44M-6 might be a slightly better lens. I'm not an expert on factory variations.
@@Simonsutak they are in pristine condition, thanks. I have sharp OM lenses, I'm looking for that swirly sexiness, do I am going with 44M I guess
Lomography Petzval 55mm f1.7 Mark II Art lens ‘bokeh control’ review?
worth knowing there are different versions of 44-2s, depending on which icon or symbol is on the lens you can tell if it was built with cheaper materials
I recently had several helios, not as many as your test. I needed to downscale. The final 2 after my testings was the 44-2 and the older 44 m39 silver. the best for sharpness?. I sold the rest of lenses and kept the 44 silver
You did a great job analyzing the topic, thank you!
You're very welcome!
Now I know why my dad loves this lense so much and always attached to his camera, and now that 44-2 is mine...
that answered all my questions, thanks for the detailed video.
@8.24 the colour rendering between the m39 and the m7 are worlds apart. The M39 seems so much warmer. I have both the M39 and 44-2 and bokeh is the same. Thanks for this very helpful study
Excellent review, thank you. Looks like you're a fellow Chiswicker!
Thank you. Yes, I am a Chiswicker! Good to hear from you. For many years I walked through Chiswick House grounds each day on my way to work, as you can see from my photos....Cheers, Simon
@@Simonsutak excellent. If I see a man about the grounds of Chiswick House with a curious old lens on his camera I'll say hello.
I have 44-3. It is mc and has lots of blades. Gee, photographers have so many choices. Are we ever satisfied? I always use a lens hood. I also have the Biotar, which I have not yet tested. Thank you for this video.
@simonsutak is the 44M (the first of them all wen you have them layed down) with M39 mount?
Could someone tell me how these lenses compare with the Petzval 85mm & 58mm? IMHO the swirl of the Petzval is quite similar!
Another excellent and technically informative video. You went to a lot of time and effort to test and report on all the lenses. If one lens had been the clear winner, then I guess that we would all rush out to purchase that version. So good to know that they are very similar. My first Helios was a 44M and unbeknown to me had the front element reversed. So purchased a second Helios last year, the early silver 44 with 13 blades. Had to be serviced because of the stiff focusing. Wonderful swirls and was surprised with the saturated colors. Also the internal flare can really add to the mood of some images.
Many thanks Rod! You must have been very put off by that reversed front element!!
Incredibly well done!! Your use of the starburst for a 3D 'view' is a brilliant & insightful idea!!
They are all the same formula, so it seems logic that they have similar character. You should measure the image circle. This could explain why there are some differences with the star filter.
I appreciate this asI am looking for a Helios lens at the moment and I feel that this essentially gives me a little more leeway to go with a tighter budget and get more or less a clean example at the best price without worrying too much about getting a specific one. It will be nice in time to expand upon that, but for now, that's where I will stand.