On Micro Four Thirds the crop factor is 2x, so the 58mm Helios equates to 116mm. Its focal length is 58mm, so a longer “normal” lens on 35mm film, and getting towards more of a portrait or short tele lens when adapted to digital, depending on your camera/sensor.ĥ8mm on an APS-C sensor with 1.5x crop factor (DSLRs, Sony E mount etc) will give an equivalent field of view of 87mm. Instead this is about my own experience with perhaps 25 or more Helios 44 lenses, and which one you should look out for.įirst, a very brief overview of the spec. Google it and you’ll find plenty of comprehensive information. If you want the potted history of the Helios 44, this is not the article. It’s about the Helios 44 range, which of course, were also made extensively in M42 mount.Īnd they’re another excellent reason to dip your toe into the world of M42. If I had to answer in one word, I’d say Takumar.Īsahi Pentax made a huge range of Takumar lenses, most of which are magnificent to use and deliver wonderful results.
These days a whole new range of M42 adapters exist to use these screw mount lenses on DSLRs and mirrorless bodies too.īut why would you want to mount an ancient screw thread lens made decades ago on a newer film or digital camera? In this post I’ll talk about why, and what to look out for when you’re ready to buy one.īefore I knew very much about lens mounts, I had at least discovered that before bayonet mounts became the norm, the most widely used way to attach a lens to a camera was to screw it in.Īnd the most common mount was M42, developed in the late 1930s, and used extensively in the 60s and 70s especially by manufacturers like Asahi Pentax, Praktica, Fujica, Yashica, and Zenit.īecause it’s a simple screw thread, a plethora of simple adapters were (and are) available to allow mounting an M42 lens on to a camera with a bayonet mount, like Pentax K, Minolta MC/MD, Canon EOS or Contax/Yashica C/Y, to name a few.
It's still an interesting lens, and maybe there was a KMZ / Japanese-factory agreement that resulted in production of this on KMZ's behalf, but I seriously doubt it.Every used a Helios 44 58mm f/2 lens? If not, I think you’ve missed out. It's a reasonable approximation at first glance, but definitely not what you'd see from the KMZ factory. And note how the left and lower lines of that trapezoid don't meet properly - there's a tiny gap. The section of the trapezoid above the V-shaped wing is too tall.
The rest of the front ring details are stated and organised as you'd expect to see on Japanese (and not Soviet) lenses.įinally. Also, the brand name Helios is in the wrong font and colour, both of which are typical of many Far Eastern manufacturers of the period. It doesn't have any design cues from other Soviet Helios models. The lens itself looks like any number of Japanese lenses from that era (and identical, except for that front ring, to the earlier Japanese Helios 28mm f/2.8 automatic). Alternatively, I guess it's just possible that the Russian KMZ plant had some deal with the Japanese manufacturer to make these lenses on their behalf for a short time. believe that's a Japanese lens with a fake or altered front ring. Thanks but i have find a lens from kmz factory.
0 kommentar(er)
