Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-15-2017, 10:35 PM - **5 Likes**

I took a few shots with the Helios 44M-4 this morning. It is a nice lens. I also have a 6 which is supposed to have better resolution. I'll put that on next. First at f2.8, second at f2, and third at f5.6.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-16-2017, 02:10 AM - **1 Like**

Another from today. I think this lens has some serious potential. Shot at f2.

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-16-2017, 11:01 PM - **2 Likes**

From today. "Small Vermilion Flower" taken at Lumphini Park, and "Mr Musk Goes to Mars" from Sathupradit Road. (Everyone puts faith into something. I'd rather put my faith in Jesus.) Flower shot taken at or near to MFD and f4, Mr Musk shot taken at f5.6.

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-18-2017, 07:32 PM

As I mentioned, I have two copies of the Helios 44. The higher the X number (44-M-X), the higher the resolution supposedly. I did some tests this morning using a tripod and the lenses without any filters attached. I thought differences in resolution would be most apparent at infinity and wide-open and in close-up wide open. The first shot of each series, infinity and close-up, is taken with the M-4. The enlarged detail shots are from the M-4 version first and the M-6 second. I also did the landscape shots at f9 (the aperture I would prefer for them) and could see no difference. While no one would want to do landscapes at infinity wide-open, I'm amazed at the amount of detail the lens resolves under those conditions. I think I prefer the M-4 in this comparison, but differences are minor and could be due to lens variation, not design. I'm not attracted to swirly bokeh, so the M-2 doesn't hold much interest for me. The M-3, on the other hand, looks interesting, and if anyone has one I'd like to hear his opinions about it.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by Andrew_Oid; 06-18-2017 at 07:38 PM.

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-19-2017, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by utak

Having read Pepe Guitarra's fine testimonial of the 44-3 here Helios 44-3 MC 58/2 - The Best Kept Secret - PentaxForums.com I decided to buy the lens 18 months ago.

My impression of the lens is that it bridges the gap between the swirly, low contrast 44-2's and the later multi-coated 44M's, that have stronger contrasts and better colour rendering, but fewer swirls (at least that's my experience). The 44-3 images are reasonably swirly with close up shots. And unlike the 44-2's, the lens handles shots at infinity quite well.

I have most of the main Helios 44 versions up to and including the 44M-4...

...and FWIW these are my conclusions:

44, 13 bladed M39 chrome: My copy is just an excellent lens. It's a joy to use the pre-set, and it performs well for both close ups and landscapes. It is swirly (but not as much as my 44-2's), centre sharp and also good as a walk around lens. A step up in IQ from my 44-2's, and the extra blades help too.

44-2 (Zebra M39 and M42 versions): Close-up centre sharp, and lots of swirls in the right conditions/compositions. The down-side is that both my lenses are bad at landscapes/infinity - the images look oily, with relatively low contrast, washed out colours and poor rendering. If I use them for landscapes, b&w and lots of pp is normally the way I go.

44-3: Better build quality than the 44-2's, a different design but still pre-set. A good solid lens, it swirls a bit less, and produces better IQ than the 44-2. The colours seem better, less washed out compared to the 44-2. I'm happy to use this a walk around lens - unlike the 44-2s.

44M: Also built like a tank with a useful A/M switch but no pre-set mechanism (if you prefer pre-sets). Images are OK, but not up to the standard of the Takumar 55's. For example, images from my version are a bit dull and lacking in contrast. It doesn't produce the same swirly effects as my 44-2's, but the results are sharp enough to handle a lot of post processing.

44M-4: This is a multi-coated lens and gets near the quality of the later Takumar 55's. Less swirl than my 44-2's, but more contrasty and more vivid colours. Sharper across the image than the 44-2's. Still benefits from a good hood, but the multi-coating makes a noticeable difference.

I have albums of photos from all these lenses on Flickr; here is the album for the 44-3 Helios 44-3 | Flickr

Hope this helps - just my personal opinion, as I know the quality/performance/swirls of Helios 44 lenses vary widely by copy!

I saw Pepe's article after I posted my inquiry - and after buying a 1991 copy on eBay. I also linked in his thread to a page with some detailed information on the Helios 44s, including the problem he refers to and a later design change that eliminated it. I have the M-6 advertised for sale in an online classifieds site here. I really like the M-4. I also like that the M-3 is a preset and is multicoated. From what I can see it might be sharper wide-open in the corners also. I look forward to a comparison. Reported resolution numbers for both are very close. Looking at your picture, Utak, it seems you have a later version of the M-3, one that doesn't have the problem Pepe described. Thanks for the information.

utak · 06-19-2017, 08:17 AM - **7 Likes**

Originally posted by Andrew_Oid

Looking at your picture, Utak, it seems you have a later version of the M-3, one that doesn't have the problem Pepe described. Thanks for the information.

You're welcome. You caught/copied my post before I deleted it!!

I'm going to beef up my deleted text and post the information in a lens review of the 44-3. It's probably more appropriately posted as a review, since there are so few. I'll add a link to my review here when I've done that. And yes, I do have a version that doesn't have the mounting problem Pepe described - I was careful to buy one with a M42 mount that fits with my Pentax M42 cameras and M42-K mount adapter.

In the meantime, here are three photos from my 44-3, with quite a lot of pp for lighting reasons! I don't think I've posted them before (apologies if I have):

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-20-2017, 04:16 AM - **1 Like**

From this evening just as the rain started. "Rainy Season IV". ISO 200, f8, 1/30sec hand-held.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-20-2017, 05:05 AM - **1 Like**

I hope no one minds one more. I wanted to see if I could get a decent shot hand-held in poor light. ISO 320 (This camera doesn't do high ISO. 320 is as high as I dare go.), f8, 1/15sec hand-held. I took four shots and for the last one (this one) I turned on Steady Shot to see if it might have any effect with MF lenses when it's set at default 50mm (I'm guessing.). It was marginally (but noticeably) sharper. Steady Shot needs more investigation.

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-20-2017, 10:24 PM

"Lunch". After examining the picture I should have used f4 and not f2.8, but it's too late now.

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-21-2017, 04:32 AM - **2 Likes**

A new poster appeared in the elevator. I can't read Thai, but I understand it well enough. Don't feed the cats! There are lots of feral dogs and cats in Thailand (and strict laws protecting them from abuse). Every now and again, the condominium management rounds up the cats that have decided to squat here and moves them elsewhere. (The dogs, 25 or so, live in the neighborhood nextdoor.) I haven't seen a campaign like this one before though. It can't work. I don't think anyone expects it to. I've seen staff pull fish out of the river to feed the cats, and the residents pamper them. (Individual pets aren't allowed.) And whatever they paid the cat in the photo, he earned it.
The second photo was taken at sunset. I don't know what to make of it. I hope it's not a HAARP attack.

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-21-2017, 09:52 PM

One from today, "Midmorning Light". ISO 100, f9, polarizing filter. I can't seem to find a comparison of the various 58mm f2 lenses made in m42 mount which I think would be very interesting. The Takumar and the Zeiss are certainly much more expensive. I suspect that's due to relative scarcity, not better IQ. The M-3 is on its way from Belarus. I'm hoping to like it even more than the M-4 which IMO is a great lens.

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-21-2017, 11:28 PM - **1 Like**

"Saber Revisited". Shot at minimum focus distance and f4.5.
I re-cropped this for my Flickr post, using the square format. It gave me more headroom, didn't cut into the base and eliminated most of the dead space. I was photographing on the top of a small washing machine, and the angle of the photograph caught the edges of it, so I was forced to make this crop. The square one is definitely better IMO.

**Crooski** · 06-22-2017, 11:57 AM - **1 Like**

Helios 44M4 @ 4.0

**Andrew_Oid** · 06-22-2017, 10:09 PM

Originally posted by Crooski

Helios 44M4 @ 4.0

Amazingly sharp depth of field for f4 and very realistic color. It's a great lens.

**goatsNdonkey** · 06-23-2017, 06:42 AM

Originally posted by Andrew_Oid

I hope no one minds one more. I wanted to see if I could get a decent shot hand-held in poor light. ISO 320 (This camera doesn't do high ISO. 320 is as high as I dare go.), f8, 1/15sec hand-held. I took four shots and for the last one (this one) I turned on Steady Shot to see if it might have any effect with MF lenses when it's set at default 50mm (I'm guessing.). It was marginally (but noticeably) sharper. Steady Shot needs more investigation.

I'm sometimes amazed by how slow a shutter speed I can manage, but here can be a wide variation, at different times, and sometimes on the same occasion. Your strategy of several attempts is a good one.

I find it interesting how different those broad cityscapes you take can look, depending on time of day, atmospheric haze, framing, and the lens. Sometimes there is something colorful that makes them srand out. Sometimes it is something about looking through those veils of atmosphere. Sometimes it is what you have selected to have sharp in the scene. In this one, the building that looks to me like a stack of shiny new dimes coming through so clearly is what draws attention, and the Helios's out-of-focus vignetting of what surrounds it makes it look like the rest is veiled by the usual atmospherics of that place....but somehow...somehow, the air has cleared between the viewer and that one shimmering structure.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax Lenses on FF Club	pinholecam	Lens Clubs	1015	11-09-2023 05:59 AM
Soviet Lens Club - MIR lens	stevewig	Lens Clubs	4	03-25-2016 02:50 AM
K-mount soviet lenses database.	micromacro	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	39	01-21-2014 11:53 AM

06-19-2017, 07:36 AM	#3485
Andrew_Oid Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Cuenca Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 647	Originally posted by utak Having read Pepe Guitarra's fine testimonial of the 44-3 here Helios 44-3 MC 58/2 - The Best Kept Secret - PentaxForums.com I decided to buy the lens 18 months ago. My impression of the lens is that it bridges the gap between the swirly, low contrast 44-2's and the later multi-coated 44M's, that have stronger contrasts and better colour rendering, but fewer swirls (at least that's my experience). The 44-3 images are reasonably swirly with close up shots. And unlike the 44-2's, the lens handles shots at infinity quite well. I have most of the main Helios 44 versions up to and including the 44M-4... ...and FWIW these are my conclusions: 44, 13 bladed M39 chrome: My copy is just an excellent lens. It's a joy to use the pre-set, and it performs well for both close ups and landscapes. It is swirly (but not as much as my 44-2's), centre sharp and also good as a walk around lens. A step up in IQ from my 44-2's, and the extra blades help too. 44-2 (Zebra M39 and M42 versions): Close-up centre sharp, and lots of swirls in the right conditions/compositions. The down-side is that both my lenses are bad at landscapes/infinity - the images look oily, with relatively low contrast, washed out colours and poor rendering. If I use them for landscapes, b&w and lots of pp is normally the way I go. 44-3: Better build quality than the 44-2's, a different design but still pre-set. A good solid lens, it swirls a bit less, and produces better IQ than the 44-2. The colours seem better, less washed out compared to the 44-2. I'm happy to use this a walk around lens - unlike the 44-2s. 44M: Also built like a tank with a useful A/M switch but no pre-set mechanism (if you prefer pre-sets). Images are OK, but not up to the standard of the Takumar 55's. For example, images from my version are a bit dull and lacking in contrast. It doesn't produce the same swirly effects as my 44-2's, but the results are sharp enough to handle a lot of post processing. 44M-4: This is a multi-coated lens and gets near the quality of the later Takumar 55's. Less swirl than my 44-2's, but more contrasty and more vivid colours. Sharper across the image than the 44-2's. Still benefits from a good hood, but the multi-coating makes a noticeable difference. I have albums of photos from all these lenses on Flickr; here is the album for the 44-3 Helios 44-3 \| Flickr Hope this helps - just my personal opinion, as I know the quality/performance/swirls of Helios 44 lenses vary widely by copy! I saw Pepe's article after I posted my inquiry - and after buying a 1991 copy on eBay. I also linked in his thread to a page with some detailed information on the Helios 44s, including the problem he refers to and a later design change that eliminated it. I have the M-6 advertised for sale in an online classifieds site here. I really like the M-4. I also like that the M-3 is a preset and is multicoated. From what I can see it might be sharper wide-open in the corners also. I look forward to a comparison. Reported resolution numbers for both are very close. Looking at your picture, Utak, it seems you have a later version of the M-3, one that doesn't have the problem Pepe described. Thanks for the information.

06-19-2017, 08:17 AM - 7 Likes	#3486
utak Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 928	Originally posted by Andrew_Oid Looking at your picture, Utak, it seems you have a later version of the M-3, one that doesn't have the problem Pepe described. Thanks for the information. You're welcome. You caught/copied my post before I deleted it!! I'm going to beef up my deleted text and post the information in a lens review of the 44-3. It's probably more appropriately posted as a review, since there are so few. I'll add a link to my review here when I've done that. And yes, I do have a version that doesn't have the mounting problem Pepe described - I was careful to buy one with a M42 mount that fits with my Pentax M42 cameras and M42-K mount adapter. In the meantime, here are three photos from my 44-3, with quite a lot of pp for lighting reasons! I don't think I've posted them before (apologies if I have):

06-22-2017, 10:09 PM	#3494
Andrew_Oid Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Cuenca Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 647	Originally posted by Crooski Helios 44M4 @ 4.0 Amazingly sharp depth of field for f4 and very realistic color. It's a great lens.

06-23-2017, 06:42 AM	#3495
goatsNdonkey Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Fulton County, Illinois Posts: 3,736	Originally posted by Andrew_Oid I hope no one minds one more. I wanted to see if I could get a decent shot hand-held in poor light. ISO 320 (This camera doesn't do high ISO. 320 is as high as I dare go.), f8, 1/15sec hand-held. I took four shots and for the last one (this one) I turned on Steady Shot to see if it might have any effect with MF lenses when it's set at default 50mm (I'm guessing.). It was marginally (but noticeably) sharper. Steady Shot needs more investigation. I'm sometimes amazed by how slow a shutter speed I can manage, but here can be a wide variation, at different times, and sometimes on the same occasion. Your strategy of several attempts is a good one. I find it interesting how different those broad cityscapes you take can look, depending on time of day, atmospheric haze, framing, and the lens. Sometimes there is something colorful that makes them srand out. Sometimes it is something about looking through those veils of atmosphere. Sometimes it is what you have selected to have sharp in the scene. In this one, the building that looks to me like a stack of shiny new dimes coming through so clearly is what draws attention, and the Helios's out-of-focus vignetting of what surrounds it makes it look like the rest is veiled by the usual atmospherics of that place....but somehow...somehow, the air has cleared between the viewer and that one shimmering structure.

Soviet lenses club

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!