Originally posted by LowVoltage I've read plenty about how people like playing with the Helios-44 of any variety. I'm left wondering if anyone has an opinion on just which variation has the right sum of its parts.
All share the characteristics of their design heritage* (Zeiss Biotar 58/2):
- Very good to excellent center sharpness decreasing towards edges and corners (less obvious on APS-C than on 24x36mm format)
- Equally sharp at all apertures
- Relatively fast maximum aperture
- Generally excellent bokeh
Some might add swirly bokeh to the list, but I prefer not to. When present, it is evidence of poor assembly more than design intent.
I own the 44M:- Has A/M switch (doesn't require conversion surgery to provide manual aperture)
- 8-blade aperture
I am looking for a MC 44-3:- Multi-coated
- Preset aperture is more flexible than M and K Helios 44 variants
- 8-blade aperture
- Somewhat sharper than my 44M
Caution -- There is a common issue with some 44-3 production where the focus ring is incompatible with most non-Zenit cameras. The near edge of the focus ring is inboard of the mount face and may bind on non-Zenit cameras. This may be remedied by sanding/milling down the back of the focus ring until it is flush.
I am also looking for a MC 44K-4:- Multi-coated
- Standard K-mount with full-automatic aperture (no adapters, no A/M switch, lens stays wide open except when metering or during the exposure)
- Somewhat sharper than my 44M
- Striking rendering on example photos on this site
FWIW, I have little interest in swirly bokeh. My interest is in pixie dust.
Pentax K10D, KMZ Helios 44M
Steve
* There are claims that the different variants represent different optical formula. This is not true. All are straight Biotar and the optical components are generally interchangeable between variants. The variants differ in regards to aperture type (preset vs. automatic), incremental performance tweeks (mostly in regards to tightening up production standards), and mechanic/cosmetic details.