Originally posted by dcshooter If you want to argue based on experience, then I can honestly tell you that I have owned several hundred, possibly over 1000 off-brand 28mm lenses over the past few years, and the majority of them have been good, if not excellent.
I can also tell you a few other things:
1) There is no such thing as a fake Helios. There are a some lenses where the wrong ID ring has been switched around between lens models (usually a 44mm-7 ring on a 44m-2) to drive up prices, but they are all Helioses. The Pentacons are mostly rebranded Meyers. Both have been widely exported to the West in their original forms with cameras bearing the Zenit, Praktica, and Hanimex labels for many decades, so your "export law" assertion is completely wrong. Heck, there are those that believe that the export Helios lenses are of much higher quality than those sold in the USSR.
2) No SLR lenses from the period of the lens shown here (70's-early 80's) had plastic/polycarbonate lens elements, which weren't introduced even in generics until the late 80's-Early nineties.
3) In the US, as in Western Europe, many optically and mechanically identical "no-name" Japanese and Korean lenses were sold both under their original marks AND as store brands or other generic names. Sears lenses. for example, were usually Chinons. Rikenons, and Samyangs. "Focal," the common generic brand used by the discount store K-Mart, often was found on Cosinas and Chinons, or Tokinas. The same thing can be seen in Europe with the Porst(Tomioka, Cosina) and Panagor(Kino) generic brands.
The reason for the different branding had NOTHING to do with legal restrictions on the brand markets. It had to do with licensing agreements between companies and third party licensees who wanted to sell products under their own label but did not have the manufacturing capacity on their own. In most cases the manufacturers were more than happy to sell their items under different labels, since they didn't have the brand recognition in the west as in their home markets. Tokina (Tokyo Kohki, 1950), Ricoh (1936), Cosina (1959), for example were old and well-respected in Japan, but not in the West. Even Canon started out in the U.S. usually marketed under the Bell and Howell name, Nikons as Tower/Sears, Pentax co-branded as Heiland/Honeywell, and even Rollei at first as Ponder and Best (aka Vivitar!) and later Honeywell.
Odd situations like the Pentax trademark, which Asahi did not own in South Africa and thus marketed as Asahiflex, were the exception, rather than the rule.
In sum, you clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, and your brand snobbishness is completely misplaced.
Dear sir/madam,
Your proposals are insulting. Calling me a brand snob to categorize me is not very nice. I do not know you or your photographic history, as you do not know mine. First of all , there are no such thing as 28 mm Helios manufactured by Russian factories ( next thing you’re going to tell me that 135mm helios are real). These are, as i explained 28 mm produced by different companies taking advantage of a non registered brand with non-legal repercussions in the selling countries (aka trade marketing)((Russian embargo)).
For n°2 i never said they where pre 80's.
For n°3 indeed it is true, nevertheless it doesn’t mean that all the lenses produced by those companies at the time where good performers, even pentax as you well know has made bad lenses. You know which ones are the good and the which ones are the bad. It is well documented by several photography aficionados. The good ones everybody knows them, the bad ones not so much.
In the last three paragraph's you contradict yourself and then confirm the "trademark" law implementation.
It seems that the use of 1000's of lenses didn't teach you anything. Maybe you should get a 1000 more.