[OzzRod]

I'm getting excited...... Requests?

Helios please! (out of interest - how many blades?)

[Sandy Hancock]

Helios please! (out of interest - how many blades?)

Eight, and very oily. There's plenty of dust in it, and the front element is a bit gnarly. Basically everything I want in a Helios.

[Zorglub]

the front element is a bit gnarly

I bet that won't be featured in many ebay auctions

I see there are several versions of that lens floating around. What did you get Sandy?

[jezza323]

I am going to go against the grain, Id love to see a month of Q 07 shield lens shots!

Actually, I might go look at buying one for my Q

---

Last edited by jezza323; 03-31-2014 at 04:25 AM.

[utak]

Helios!

I don't want to butt-in to a month I'm not going to be around for, but on the Helios.... I've got the 44-2, the 44M and the 44M-4. Purchased in London flea markets for a grand total of $50. The 44-2 is the best by some distance to me, followed by the 44M-4, which has fewer blades - 6 vs.8 - but better coatings and is sharp as hell, but less swirly bokeh. (Edit: the 44-2 is very sharp at the centre too).

The 44-2 is a bit wobbly on the screwmount and the images can glow and sometimes flare like someone has smeared the lens with military tank oil. But it has the great advantage of dual aperture rings at the front; one for setting the f-stop, and the other that allows you to open and shut the blades without changing the f-setting...so you can see your bokeh change infront of your eyes, so to speak. That's a lot of fun. The other 44M and 44M-4 don't have these dual rings.

I hope you use the lens Sandy, it'll be great to see what you make of it. The thing to watch out for is how vibrant and colourful (and saturated) the images are. If they look milky/creamy and not too contrasty around the edges, and maybe smeared with a bit of tank oil to give a glow, then that's what you really get. So many Helios 44-2 images on the web look more vibrant, with wonderful crazy swirly bokeh, but they've had a LOT of PP'ing (the images can take it). Personally, I often PP to accentuate the bokeh as its so interesting. But here is one without stressing the bokeh, taken a few days ago during the March challenge.

[jackassp]

Eight, and very oily. There's plenty of dust in it, and the front element is a bit gnarly. Basically everything I want in a Helios.

Once again, I will say that the Aperture is meant to be oily on the Helios. It's a "preset" lens.

You focus with the aperture wide open, then stop down to the desired aperture, do the green button thing, and then fire off the shot.
Without oil (or like mine, if the oil starts to dry out) the aperture blades get stuck and won't close when you stop down.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/76350-helio...tml#post774498

I would join you in using the Helios, except mine has a decided crack all the way through an internal element.

Jack.

[HockeyDad]

Holy aperture Batman that renders smooothly @f4! I say go with that one :-)

Oh. My word. That. ThatthatthatTHAT.

Wow! Holy Helios!

My thoughts exactly! What a treat!

[Sandy Hancock]

OK, OK already - I hear y'all. Helios 44-2 it is. I might have to use the 07/Q7 in parallel though....
Proposed theme: At Home in Autumn.

[dcBear78]

Still unsure whether to go 18-135 or FA77? Haven't done a challenge with either but I know and love the 77 already. As for the zoom I have never really achieved anything great with it. All my shots with it are fairly pedestrian, but this in of itself is a reason to use it to get better results. I guess I will decide in the morning.

[VisualDarkness]

Go with the 77!

[g026r]

As for the zoom I have never really achieved anything great with it. All my shots with it are fairly pedestrian, but this in of itself is a reason to use it to get better results.

For the longest time I could never figure out why I was always unimpressed with all my shots from my 18-135. Then it dawned on me that it was because I only ever stuck it on the camera when the weather (and consequently, the lighting) was terrible.

[amseaman]

I'm trying to decide what to do about April. I have a number of old manual lenses that I've been given or that I've acquired that I rarely use. And I have a 28mm lens that I have never used, mostly because I know nothing about the company or lens. -- Marexar-CX 28mm F2.8 <- anyone know anything about Marexar? I also have a Marexar 80-200mm F4.5 - any thoughts?

[dcBear78]

For the longest time I could never figure out why I was always unimpressed with all my shots from my 18-135. Then it dawned on me that it was because I only ever stuck it on the camera when the weather (and consequently, the lighting) was terrible.

As I was writing that I realised that I only ever put it on when I don't really know when and where I am going. So most images are either touristy or just plain uninspired because I will change to one of my other lenses for a shot I particularly want.

[todd]

Hey guys, remember me? Well, it so happens that I have *Tres from Tres Amigos headed my way, so I think I may be in for April.

*FA43

[NaClH2O]

Hey guys, remember me? Well, it so happens that I have *Tres from Tres Amigos headed my way, so I think I may be in for April.

*FA43

Hey todd, wouldn't the FA43 be dos? Unless of course you mean it's your tres. BTW it's my favorite of the 3.

NaCl(it's easy but not very nice to confuse us poor old geezers)H2O