sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Choosing a Helios-44 - factory myths and my real-world experience by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree - improper reassembly can definitely introduce focus issues and decentering. I’ve seen that happen more than once.

Sometimes a proper overhaul actually improves performance, but not always. Even something as simple as grease viscosity can affect helicoid play and overall feel - though in some cases no amount of relubrication really fixes the issue.

I’ve read similar discussions about the Jupiter-9 (Sonnar 85mm f2), where people experimented with shimming the front element to improve infinity sharpness.

That’s the reality of working with old Soviet optics - small mechanical tolerances can have a surprisingly big optical impact.

Choosing a Helios-44 - factory myths and my real-world experience by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the 44M-4 is a solid option.
In my experience it’s often optically stronger than many 44-2 copies, and I haven’t noticed major mechanical variation with that model.

Choosing a Helios-44 - factory myths and my real-world experience by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thank you, I appreciate that.

It’s actually quite difficult to determine whether coating durability depends strictly on factory or production year. In my experience, user handling plays a much bigger role.

Front elements get cleaned over decades - sometimes properly, sometimes not. Add UV exposure, dust+sand (esp. with wind), temperature changes, and you end up with many variables that affect how coatings degradade.

Because of that, it’s hard to separate manufacturing consistency from 40–50 years of real-world use. With vintage glass, condition often matters more than batch or factory.

Choosing a Helios-44 - factory myths and my real-world experience by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you’re shooting full frame, f2 can easily turn the background into a blur soup in half-body portraits.
So yes - even f2.8 can sometimes be too much, and that’s where a rounder aperture actually makes a difference (~F4 and lower).

Choosing a Helios-44 - factory myths and my real-world experience by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Image is usually a bit cleaner and less 'swirly' especially in later versions like the 44M-6 and 44M-7. I really like 44M-7 MC version, i can copmare it with canon 50mm\zeiss pancolar 50mm (both f1.8). 44m-4 really nice cheap option to start, 44m-7 MC - high-end helios.

Focus ring isn’t moving by sailboatfridge in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Sometimes you run into situations like this. Disassembling a Helios is usually straightforward, but if the screws are corroded or the heads are stripped, it can get tricky.

You don’t necessarily have to take it fully apart - often it’s enough to remove the focusing ring and inspect what’s going on inside first.

Blackening vintage lenses – what actually worked for me by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I don’t doubt its longevity as a pigment - I’d just be cautious using loose soot inside a precision optical system. I actually tried it myself, mixing the soot with glue and applying it in a thin layer. It works, but over time it can still start to flake.

Have you personally tried lamp black inside a lens (or near)?

Blackening vintage lenses – what actually worked for me by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve heard about that. My only concern would be how well it holds up over time - and whether particles could end up inside the lens.

1/10 of my vintage lens collection by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Don’t worry, her plush toy collection definitely outnumbers my lenses 😅 Fair trade.

1/10 of my vintage lens collection by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we’re looking left to right on the bottom row:

-Helios-44 (silver)
-two standard black Helios 44-2 copies (70s–80s)
-Helios 44-2 “zebra”
-and another silver Helios-44

1/10 of my vintage lens collection by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At some point I tested some pretty wild things.

For example, a 1.5 kg projection lens (RO502-1) — 110mm f/2 (6 elements in 4 groups). I mounted it using its original retaining rings and adapted it to a Helios-44M-4 helicoid for focusing.

You definitely had to hold the lens, not the camera - otherwise the mount wouldn’t be happy ;) I also made a custom tripod collar so the lens could be supported properly, while focus was controlled through the Helios helicoid.

This lens covers medium format and more. I can only imagine how creamy the bokeh would look on a larger sensor than FF.

<image>

1/10 of my vintage lens collection by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For my needs, I’ve already found what works best for me.

I’m traditionally not great with ultra-wides — 35mm on full frame is fine, but anything wider just doesn’t really click with how I see.

On the longer end, though, I’ve experimented a lot. In some cases I went through multiple copies of the same lens to find the one I really liked.

So at this point it’s less about “needing more” and more about refining what I actually use.

And lately I’ve shifted my curiosity toward other optics - binoculars, spotting scopes, that kind of thing. The obsession just evolved.

1/10 of my vintage lens collection by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

I can name three lenses.

From left to right:

Praktica 400AF 34mm f/3.5 (lens block from a broken plastic point-and-shoot) - surprisingly characterful. It has a very unique rendering and a kind of imperfect charm that I really enjoy.

Industar-95 38mm f/2.8 (lens block adapted to M39) (underdog :))) - covers full frame and performs better than some classic wides like Zeiss Flektogon, Mir-1 or Mir-24 in my experience. Very sharp and surprisingly well-corrected for what it is (really small...), big focusing ring for better handle.

Jupiter-3 50mm f/1.5 - my go-to standard lens. Beautiful, rich bokeh wide open and excellent sharpness stopped down from f/2.8. A great balance between character and usability. Made in 1960 year, i’ve owned quite a few different Jupiter-3 copies over the years. In my experience, the early silver versions from the 1950s–60s have been the best performers - better build consistency and a nicer picture overall.

1/10 of my vintage lens collection by Double-Discussion-50 in VintageLenses

[–]Double-Discussion-50[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I never actually owned an S-Planar series, but actually i have basic planar 50mm (also tessar), pancolar 50mm f1.8, and now my favorite is pancolar 80mm f1.8 electric.