I suspect that many photographer wrinkles on the nose when I tell of my Helios-lens, manufactured in BeLOMO, Minsk in the early 80’s 90’s. Surely it can’t be any good?
Helios 44-3 front
The states of former Soviet union actually made a lot of good camera equipment, and what I’m going to write about now is a copy from a Carl Zeiss-factory that ended up in the Eastern block after the war and “moved” to russia. Helios is a Carl Zeiss Biotar-copy. Lets see how it handles…
My purchase
I won a Zenit ET camera, a flash and Helios lens on Tradera, swedish ebay, for SEK 100 (about £8.30). The advertisement said nothing about the lens and the markings on the lensfront was shielded by lenscap. After Google on camera model Zenit ET revealed that the camera had standard MC Helios 44-3 58mm / 2 (it could also have been equipped with Industar-lens). Since earlier I knew that Helios-lenses is appreciated internationally. So the bidding started… and I won :)
Zenit ET with Helios-lens
About the lens
MC Helios (ГЕЛИОС) 44-3 58mm / 2 was produced as mentioned at BeLOMO in Minsk (Belarus). It has M42-thread, and thus fits my adapter to EOS. Other Helios models was manufactured in (KMZ) Krasnogorsk / Moscow or elsewhere.
Helios 44-3 58mm/f2 from behind
It is a preset lenses, which means that it has two rings to deal with the aperture. No wonder it can be confusing before you know how it works. You set the aperture before taking the picture, but when you focus you would like to have more light (right?) and then you can open up completely with the other aperture ring. Robust, good minimal focus distance, flexible rings. On the EOS the focal length equivalent is (58mm * 1.6) 92.8 mm.
Side with presetrings on Helios 44-3
Somehow this lens makes me to think of Russian tanks from the Second World War (like the T-34), built to hold through the Russian winter and functioning before the feature (as opposed to the German tanks which froze in the snow). This lens is sharp, durable and does what it should.
Opinion
I have used this for quite a while now, actually. I have tried it in many different situations, I find it sharp with very good bokeh. Colours are most often good, only encountered some very bright light when colours feelt a little washed out (but in that circumstance, it could have been the case with any lens). I think it’s a good idea to usse a lenshood.
Images
The images are shot over time since march this year. I’ve tried to make a set which show different motifs for the lens. I often use it at big aperture because I really like it’s bokeh. The blue window image uses a high grade polarizer.
My wife and daughter
Roses at Nikolai
Glasses on wall
Japanese cherry
Blueberries
Golden straw
Blue birdtower-window
Plus
- Sharp
- Good bokeh
- Robust
- Good contrasts in backlight.
- The system of aperture ring / preset
- Inexpensive
Minus
- Not sure if it has been steady saturation?
- If you do not get an explanation how the aperture work, it was confusing
- Not the same number of apertureblades as some in this series from Helios.
Links
- Helios 44 on flickr
- My topic on mflenses.com
- “Helios differences” on Manual Focus forum
- About Helios 44-2 on povlab
Like what you say Mattias and generally agree though my lens is a 44-2 what i tend to do is leave it set to F16 and use the open/close ring to set the aperture rather like the clutch on a car, if you understand me. I have several Russian lenses and use this method with all of them taht have the 2 rings. As you say good bokeh and it focuses fairly close too, a much better lens than it was ever given credit for in years gone by and also quite inexpensive. Have you tried the Industar 50-2? might be an eye opener. Good luck Richard
Hi and thanks for comment :) Haven’t tried the Industar yet, but I’m sure the day will come ;)
Quite oddly, the name of the lens is spelled differently as someone could expect: ГЕΛИОС with accent on L. I’m not by any means an expert on this field but as far as i know the “Λ” does not exist in Cyrillic alphabet but the Greek one. Could someone clear this story?
Also, I’ve found on http://m42.artlimited.net/lens_detail.php?lid=154 that the product start year is 1992. Maybe a mistake?
Hm, that’s weird… I got the info from the seller that my copy was bought in russia in the 80’s, but I’m not sure how reliable that source is.
Hi Mattias! In Soviet lenses first 2 digits in s/n show mfg. year, so your lens lens was produced in 1991.
Oh, that’s interesting :) I assumed that the camera and lens was form the same time, but then the cameras must be older then the lens, right? :)
Hi there. I have some question about your m42-eos adapter. I have EOS 300 (without D), and I have bought adapter, but I’m faced difficulties with focusing. I mean the adapter is blocking lens focusing ring (can’t turn it over) and I can’t focus to objects which are further than ~2 metets.
You wrote, that this lens fits to your adapter. Could You tell me, what adapter do You have? I assume that You haven’t such problems like mine :)
Hello, no I don’t have those problems however they can be different between camera models. I know for example some people modify the mirror on the EOS 5D to use manual lenses.
My adapter was bought in a swedish webstore, http://www.kaffebrus.com/adapter-m42-till-canon-eos-118.html , they say it’s the brand “DKE” but I don’t know more about them. Im not sure they sell to other countries or not, but I see you can change currency to €
Hi Mattias,
I read your very interesting review and some days ago I found on ebay a 44-3 MC lens in excellent conditions, so I bought it.
I received it but – it is my first preset lens – i find it a bit singular.
In my copy, aperture setting ring is tight and the diaphragm ring is very loose.
Are they normal or I am in trouble?
I have tried to find on internet but I have not find any response.
Thanks