| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2010 Location: Bucharest, Romania Posts: 1,465
9 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 15, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | IQ, built like a tank, sharpness, swirly bokeh | | Cons: | corner sharpness, stiff focus rings, QC | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
THIS LENS IS PHENOMENAL.
When used properly (hood is a must), this lens has incredible sharpness. Corner sharpness wide open stinks, though. Absolutely unbelievable performance for a $15 lens, given that some pay up to 100 times more for a portrait lens. "It's all that one may ever, ever need", as a forum colleague said. The focal length is noticeably different from a standard 50mm.
I will let some of my pictures tell the story of the lens. The one which is not wide open, is at f/11.
IMGP6511.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP5997.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP5330.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
_1A_0038.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP8921.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP8939.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP4847.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP4843.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP4819.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP4770.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
25A_0028-2.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP3948.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP3779.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP3771.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP3204.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP3085.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
IMGP6374.jpg by kcobain1992, on Flickr
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: July, 2012 Posts: 928
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 19, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Extra-ordinary results for the price | | Cons: | Wobbles a bit on the M42 screwmount | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
One really needs to suspend the laws of ratings for this lens. Just before posting this review, the Helios' average rating was 9.23 while the FA50 1.4 was 8.86, and the FA's optical quality is in a different league to the Helios. Plus the FA also delivers beautiful bokeh, in an entirely different fashion. So I'm rating the Helios an 8.
But, but, but.....rating by fun, swirly bokeh (most love, some hate), 'dirt-cheapness' and even its gun-metal feeling and smell, the Helios is beyond a 10. Forget about trying to re-create that famous swirly bokeh at f2 for a moment, close the aperture from the front (that's fun too), and its actually a center-sharp lens. It also delivers lovely pastel like colors on a sunny day, as long as its not pointing near the sun's rays, as it flares outrageously. Colour contrast is not always great, so images often need PP tweaking.
This lens can re-juvinate one's love for photography; rushing back to the computer to look at the results, just like people used to rush off to collect their developed negatives.
The big handling issue I have is that my lens wobbles on M42 screwmount because of its design, something that the 44M's snug fit avoids, so I got both, plus a lot of dirt (on the 44M), very cheaply.
EDIT: My 44-2 version was made in 1975 in the Valdai plant....and here are some examples of swirly bokeh
 | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2019 Posts: 15
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 20, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Smooth action, sturdy build | | Cons: | Over-rated and hyper-inflated | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 7
Camera Used: Zenit E Pentax K2
| |
Is the 44-2 that different to the Helios 58mm "44"? Nope, the difference is all hype and online blurb that hinges on which online old lens trader has a surplus to sell.
A classic Hipster lens and suffers from over-enthusiastic reviews from many frantic people who want to appeal to that style. It's amazing how basic lenses that sold in their thousands upon thousands by amateurs so many decades ago have suddenly become sought after with huge value inflation that grows and grows as these old lenses get more and more worn out and run down. They are, and will always be, cheap and cheerful. But they are also fairly robust, well-made, and genuinely good lenses. Some versions are better than others, some are better looked after than others.
Bokeh? This nice lens is one of the most over-rated around since online entrepreneurs started to pump up the sellers-market nonsense about this being a "swirly bokeh" lens. The 44-2 is not a "swirly bokeh" lens in a generic manner because it varies a lot from lens to lens. Some are good or not so good because of variable quality standards in the different five or six factories where these were made. Also, some Helios 58mm 44-2 lenses are different to each other as there are a few versions around. Some just vary because different manufacturing standards and checks were in place across the long length of production through the years. Some vary because they were early or late lenses in historical production. Some vary because previous owners have meddled with them or swapped out lenses in the glass stack. And, of course, a lot of people enhance Bokeh digitally after taking the picture, so you rarely see a raw image untouched. It's all variable. This makes finding a fine lens and talking control of your expectations a real hit and miss game. Finally, because many people don't understand that with a digital camera, both software and sensor/processor interact with a lens - Bokeh is not always down to just the lens. For example, you'll get better Bokeh if used with a full-frame digital sensor than a smaller one. For example, depending on software presets on both camera and scanners, images change considerably.
Some rip-off merchants on Ebay, and elsewhere, that cash in on the online linguistic feeding frenzy about "bokeh" will take a lot of money from you before you find one that gives you something like the heavily software-manipulated images you'll see in Google image banks. Moreover, the "swirly bokeh" online talk often avoids telling you this only happens strongly at low apertures on some digital full frame cameras. Others will be more honest and say clearly that the effect is not down to only the lens, but how the digital processor/sensor interacts with specific lenses in the Helios 44-2 range. Good luck with your search if you follow all that swirly bokeh stuff with belief. While you throw your money around, you'll also find some lenses that have been abused and butchered by lots of people trying to find out why they have no "swirly bokeh" to enjoy. If you do buy one, check first what quality of image it takes and on what camera it was taking pictures through. Otherwise, you could be buying a poor one; especially for Bokeh quality.
Beyond all that, this is a great lens to have. It's not overly sharp across the full f-stop range in all contexts of exposure in itself. It's very good on f8 and f11 and often good at f5.6, and it can take some very nice photos either side of that sweet spot range. mechanically, it is a lovely lens. Lovely fit and finish with some versions and nice coatings with some versions. Sweet focus ring movement (if a rather large and slow turning circle) and nice mechanics all around. The double functioning aperture rings are fun to use, even if it is confusing to get used to. It also has to be turned backwards to close down the aperture before taking the photo. The main aperture ring can be very clunky or stiff because of the stiff retaining system inside the lens, but don't worry as this is often normal. Don't waste time messing with this to "lube" it. The lovely big size of this lens feels good and it's lovely to use and hold in your hand, but remember that what it feels like does not make your photos any better.
Oil on the aperture rings is normal and because the manual function is not affected by this, you don't have to see it as an issue. Because it was made as a cheap and cheerful lens, internal dust and filth is to be expected. Some versions are famous for having bubbles in the glass, but unless you have lots, a small few make no difference to your images. Very easy to open up and service. A great lens to start with if you want to try lens servicing for yourself. If you find one advertised as "no oil on blades" and "little/no dust" then you know it's been opened and fiddled with (remember that the oil on the blades is there for a reason with this lens) or maybe it has been cleaned out. The rear lens is often found to be factory glued in place. So if you remove the glass, make sure you glue it back or it can fall out.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: Klaipeda Posts: 78
3 users found this helpful
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: February, 2014 Posts: 408
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 24, 2019 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | lovely effects contra-jour if you use the flare right | | Cons: | flare contra-jour! | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Zenit E, Pentax KS-1
| |
My first standard lens, bought with a Zenit E back in the mid 1960s. Still have the lens and camera, still working...not bad for £18 from Jessops when they only had one tiny shop in Leicester!
As I said above, the lens is prone to flare, and also a little soft wide-open, but back then I managed many candid shots indoors using the lens wide open, and hand-holding at a guestimated 1/5 second. They all printed fine using Ilford HP3 and then HP4 film. Some of my favourite shots are from those days....
The lens of course is not actually a 'copy' of the Zeiss Biotar, technically it IS a Biotar because when the Russians seized the Zeiss photographic machines and designs-plus the personnel, of course-they continued to maufacture the same lenses using the same equipment for decades, and apart from modifying the body of the lens and improving the lens coating to make it slightly less flare-prone, it remains nevertheless a Biotar at heart.Some I dismantled back in the 1960s still had German markings on some of the inetrnal parts . (The same applies to a number of other Russian lenses and cameras, of course-and when repairing a pre-war Contax shutter the much later Kievs provide an excellent source of parts. Not as well finished as the Zeiss, but every screw hole lines up, and every internal screw uses the same pitch thread. Surprising when you consider the use those machines must have had over the decades since 1945!)
So a cheap lens for your arsenal, and you can end up with sharp wide-open examples as much as you can find VERY soft versions! But they are a lovely lens in use, and make a decent portrait lens on film and digital given the 58mm focal length. Just DON'T pay a huge amount from a seller who tries to sell you one as 'rare' or 'sought after'!
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: June, 2014 Posts: 58
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 18, 2019 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | beautiful rendering and bokeh, easy to focus, small, cheap! | | Cons: | poor contrast wide open, flare! | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Samsung NX30, Pentax Z-1P
| |
I received this lens as a gift. The lens is in great optical and mechanical condition. On a cropped sensor it makes beautiful portraits and flower shots with impressionistic bokeh and pastel colours. Is it sharp? Surprisingly, yes! Wide open the centre of the frame is sharp enough for portraits and the corners become decent at F8. There aren't any chromatic aberrations to speak of.
Build quality seems pretty good, obviously my lens wasn't made at the year end  The focusing ring is very smooth and rotates 270 degrees allowing for precise focusing. I like the two aperture rings. I set the clicked ring to F8 and adjust the aperture smoothly between F2 and F8 which covers most of my shooting needs.
The main drawback of this lens is poor coating and inner blackening. You don't want to shoot against the light with it – the flare is hideous! A screw-on 49mm hood makes big difference.
I highly recommend Helios 44-2 for amateurs who want to step away from the kit zoom and try a manual prime lens without breaking the bank. It's fun to use and great for learning. Shooting Helios 44-2 is like driving a Lada: if you learn to do it you will have no problem driving any car
As Russian photographers say: "Among ten Nikkors there aren't two different ones, among ten Helios' there aren't two similar ones". Buying a Helios is always a lottery, but considering the ticket price, I think it's a lottery worth playing.
Samsung NX30
Samsung NX30
Samsung NX30
Pentax Z-1P, Kodak Gold 200
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: December, 2010 Location: California Posts: 28
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 30, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | The lens so nice, I bought it twice.. (by accident..) | | Cons: | I bought it twice, sooo. I had to HACK it into a 'tilt-shift'.. | |
I purchased this lens BECAUSE of its swirly, circular, vortexy bokeh - I had no clue about M or 44-2 or all the varients, I was very new to these M42 mount lenses and haden't been shooting long.
I ended up with two of the same copy - both 44-M 2/58MM *I shoot with a Caonon 50D so that makes it actually a 70 something MM lens*
It is nice and sharp, has VERY nice contrast, great color, Awesome bokeh - but, not been able to get VERY swirly bokeh, just somewhat of a circular appearance.
It was painful, to pay as much as I did (got them both from France) BUT, I got two really awesome lenses, that I will keep forever, (unless someone offers to want to trade me for a killer Zeiss.. and I don't see that happening)
(just sayin)
*will post a picture of the 'lovingly hacked' into a tilt shift... just like my osawa 28MM... *
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2010 Location: California Posts: 484
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 27, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | price, sharpness, unique character, preset aperture ring | | Cons: | prone to flare | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
I love this lens for its bargain price and unique character, but the current average rating of 9.4 seems a bit excessive. My copy of the 44-2 made in 1978 is very prone to flare, and by this metric, it's not even remotely in the same league as my Super-Takumar 55/1.8 that can be had for not much more. I'm a bit puzzled by the fact that some reviews here attest to its above average flare control. I suspect in some cases this is because they weren't really about the 44-2 but about a later Helios variant. That said, when all goes well, the results with this lens can be nothing short of stunning. It is one of the few lenses I own that still manages to surprise me.
Lily by Ludger Solbach, on Flickr
Seriously? by Ludger Solbach, on Flickr
Brush Strokes by Ludger Solbach, on Flickr
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: August, 2009 Location: Lexington, KY Posts: 30
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 4, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $33.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp wide open, no flare, technically perfect bokeh | | Cons: | Focus turns too tightly, no a/m switch, not too close focus | |
I now have two Helios lenses: a "minty" 44M-4 that cost me $33 including shipping from the Russian Federation and a 44M-7 that came with a Zenit 122 for $37. Actually, the 44M-7 came in unexpectedly sad condition, with a stuck-open aperture, lots of thin oil (from a botched repair attempt?) in it and on some internal lens surfaces, and some cleaning scratch marks on the front element, so I was given a $5 partial refund to compensate.
I am using both on APS-C digital. Unfortunately, unlike the older 44 versions, these are not preset lenses, but automatic without an external preview or manual switch. Thus, I have semi-permanently glued-down the rear pin so that they function as manual aperture lenses.
I got the 44M-4 to see what the Soviet lenses were all about without spending too much money. The grading used in later 44M lenses says that the 44M-4 has a bit better resolution than the older versions, but not quite as good as a -5, -6, or -7. After seeing the 44M-4 is very good, I felt it was a good idea to try a 44M-7.
The resolution numbers quoted seem about right for both lenses... and they're VERY good numbers for wide open. Sharpness gets scary good when stopped down a little. I'm shocked the 44M-7 resolved anything with oil on some elements, but it is very slightly better than the 44M-4.
Overall IQ is very nice and "Zeiss-ish" in flavor, tending to be very neutral or even a bit cold in color rendering. There is virtually no flare, even with the sun in the frame... actually better than my SMC 50mm f/1.4. These lenses also give an outstanding blur even for complex out-of-focus regions. That said, there are mild sharp edge artifacts in the PSF/bokeh for high-contrast or specular regions, although they usually are not too disturbing. Bokeh before and after the focus point have different characteristics, with after looking better (i.e., they are undercorrected). Here's a simple example from the 44M-4; no processing other than rescale:
Physical construction of these lenses looks very Zeiss-like. The lubrication on the focus collar was way too plentiful and viscous on both copies... and it looks like somebody tried to fix that in the 44M-7 by adding thin oil! Just swabbing out excess lubricant really helps make the focus smoother and easier to turn; you don't even have to completely disassemble the lens to do this. The aperture blades are fairly bright metal, more light gray than black, and I'm sure they will cause reflections under some circumstances. The 44M-4 has minor rust-like marks on two of the lens mount screws, which is really strange given how pristine-looking this lens is in every other way (substandard steel screws?). In summary, the mechanical and assembly quality is functional but coarse.
There is no lack of quality apparent in the optical performance. Overall, I have to say I am very impressed. These lenses really do belong in at least the same class as the 55mm f/1.8 Takumars, and they easily outclass the Super Takumar 55mm f/2.0 that I have (which even has much worse build quality issues). Either copy is a more reliable, if less spectacular, performer than the SMC 50mm f/1.4. There are a number of comments on the WWW about the Soviet "copies" of the old Zeiss Biotar being improved over the years; optically, I think that's right, although the differences are incremental.
I rated the SMC 50mm f/1.4 a "10" because of its bokeh, commenting that it was really a "9" otherwise (or an "8" before UV treatment). Well, this 44M-4 is a straight "9.5" with only mechanical, not optical, issues. The now-cleaned 44M-7 is very slightly better despite having lived a much tougher life, but the improvement over the 44M-4 isn't big enough to worry about, so it's another straight 9.5.
About the cleaning: The 44M-7 is the first lens I've really taken apart, cleaned, and reassembled. Just wiping excess grease off the helical made the focus much smoother and easier to turn, so the problem really isn't the tolerances for the metal parts. I didn't disassemble the aperture mechanism itself, but just kept wiping oil off blades and operating it until none reappeared... which temporarily made the aperture work well, although oil has since reappeared and the aperture is getting slow. Getting oil, and an oily fingerprint, off the internal elements had surprisingly little effect on the image quality, mostly cleaning-up the PSF, improving contrast, and reducing flare... resolution was barely affected. There was nothing I could do about the scratches/cleaning marks on the front element, but they are minor, and not even obvious in the PSF.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Ireland Posts: 31
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 7, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $7.50
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Cheap, sharp, cheap | | Cons: | | |
I have the 44M version of this lens. From the beginning I expected it to be good, from what I'd seen of other users' shots with it and I wasn't disappointed. This lens is only cheap because 2 million of them were turned out over 40 years - if it had a Zeiss label on it, you can be sure it would be selling for several times the price.
Everbody should grab one of these just for a laugh, at this price. They're commonly only fetching less than a tenner in the UK and you can't go wrong at that.
There is, as you would expect, a degree of copy variation, but even the worst example is still quite good. Remember, this was a Russian copy of the Carl Zeiss Biotar and as time went on the Russians improved on it.
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2018 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: March 13, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive, lovely rendition of colour | | Cons: | On APS-c limited to portraits and moderate telephoto work | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-01
| |
Happy with this lens. Mostly used for portraits because 58mm on APS-c (eq to 90mm on full frame) also works well as medium telephoto. The lens is a pleasure to use, to get the swirly bokeh one needs to experiment with the distance between the subject and the background.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: September, 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,070 | | Review Date: March 29, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, excellent bokeh, good low light abilities | | Cons: | Lower contrast and less resistance to flare as modern lenses | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-3
| |
For the $40 total I paid including the shipping from Russia, I have to say this is a 10/10 lens. I mean, I can easily spend more than this eating at a decent restaurant! My lens arrived in ok shape but was shipped in only an envelope with only a layer of bubble wrap around it. Definitely proof how tough these things are built to make it through that trip! It did have some oil on the aperture blades but this is a known issue of this lens and I knew it would when I bought it. I wish it had a little faster aperture but f2 really is good enough these days with how good camera tech is.
This lens is very sharp wide open in the center even on my high resolving K-3, and stopped down a little is sharp corner to corner. It seems at a wide open aperture it struggles to focus to infinity a bit, so stopping down is a must for landscapes. My Takumar 50mm f1.4 also struggled here, I think it more has to do with my off brand m42 to K mount adapter than anything else.
The Helios has very little purple fringing even shooting chrome objects in bright light. And the swirly bokeh you can get wide open is neat and my main reason for purchase, but the bokeh is also amazingly smooth the way it transitions at all apertures. You can tell this is really a Zeiss copycat lens when using it.
The only downsides are lower contrast which is no issue to me since I can increase it when editing on my computer, and that it is manual focus only. My copy is buttery smooth and nice to focus, but near its minimum focus distance there is a little extra friction when turning the barrel. I'm not entirely sure how the preset aperture rings on these lenses work, but one of my two aperture rings seems stuck. I think it is the aperture limiting one, which doesn't really matter because I can control the whole aperture range from f2-f16 with the other working one so functionality it isn't affected. Plus I think I prefer it this way. It turns very smoothly without any clicks, which would be good for video too. I use this lens in aperture priority mode and adjust metering to my liking with the exposure comp. Works great!
Here is a few samples I have taken:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/joshhphotography/albums/72157704302188792 | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2019 Location: Ontario Posts: 15 | | Review Date: March 28, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharp in the centre, natural colour rendition, artistic bokeh, little to no axial CA, sturdy and durable, easy to repair, good value, lightweight and compact | | Cons: | very flare-prone, contra-light performance, corner softness, corner CA, soft at close distances, eight blades, two-ring preset aperture | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Sony a6300
| |
This lens is well built. It's lightweight and compact, making it highly portable. It's also quite sturdy. Should you ever have any problems with the lens' mechanics, it is easy to open up.
Optically speaking, this lens performs okay. Sharpness is good in the centre at all apertures, though it is somewhat soft wide-open when doing close-up photography (spherical aberrations at play). When stopped down, this lens becomes very sharp in the centre. The corners are not sharp at any aperture, though that is not a problem, so long as you don't use this as a landscape lens. My copy of this lens is probably one of the better ones, as at medium distances to infinity, it is quite sharp in the centre, on par with my Helios 77m-4.
Colour rendering is warm and natural, as is the norm for single-coated Soviet optics. Some may say it's boring, I personally quite like it.
The bokeh is really interesting. It can deliver soft and creamy bokeh if you use it right (or in the case of this lens, wrong). However, creamy bokeh is boring. This lens can deliver the (in)famous swirly bokeh, even on APS-C, and some soap-bubble bokeh to go with it. This is a lens that makes producing bokeh a fun artistic adventure.
Sweet.
One thing that is not so sweet about this lens is its contra-light performance. Not only does it flare quite a bit, which is to be expected, it also loses a lot of contrast when shot contra-light wide open. It loses a lot more contrast than my other Soviet lenses, so it's not a coating issue, but a blackening issue. On my copy, stopping the lens down to about f2.5 clears up the abnormal flaring. I've used a sharpie to better blacken the lens elements, which mostly solved the problem.
You don't buy this lens for its sharpness, you buy it for its character. This is first and foremost a lens for subject photography, and it does its job extremely well.
Photos, unedited (Shot wide open or stopped down to f2.8 unless stated otherwise. Shot in AdobeRGB, so please view with a properly colour-managed browser)
There is sharpness if you need it
f4
f2.8
Even stopped down to f5.6, corner sharpness is pretty bad...
In this photo, that's not a problem at all.
Artistic bokeh:
Love that swirl!
Contra-light torture test after sharpie fix:
 | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2018 Posts: 6 | | Review Date: June 28, 2018 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Still affordable, unique swirly bokeh | | Cons: | Overrated, unpredictable rendering | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 9
| |
Lots of things have been said about this lens.
Sharpness is ok, not outstanding but good considering the age of the optics. Well used, it has an unique swirly bokeh signature, quite impressive. The effect is even stronger on full frame.
The problem with the Helios 44 is that it's rendering is unpredictable. Sometimes it's beautiful and probably better than any other lens, sometimes it is just flat and dull. It's good for portraits, flowers and generally bokeh but used outside on a sunny day, and better with trees and leaves on the background. Well, it's a good lens but a specific one.
I think it's a fun lens every photographer can buy, but don't expect it to replace anything. It's unique, that's why it's fun. It also means that you cannot do everything with it. Don't pay more than 30 € for a perfect sample!
| | | | | Custom User Title Registered: January, 2016 Location: Alberta Posts: 6,806 | | Review Date: March 21, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | fun, cheap, sharp, cool swirly bokeh | | Cons: | preset aperture, have to use an adapter to k-mount with manual focus/aperture | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 7
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-S2
| |
A fun, swirly bokeh (for me, even on APS-C), cheap little russian lens.
Well worth the money just to have a bit of fun seeing how to get the most swirl in a shot!
Great for interesting portraits!
Love that it says Made in Russia on it - it's a fun conversation starter | | |
;)
;)
