Helios 44-2 Lens: Watch This BEFORE You Buy (2024)

where would the last kmz version fall on the spectrum of quality?

I tried two different versions of these lenses because they get so much hype. Both were disappointing, and not worth the money. Lots of lenses out there that are nicer for about the same price.

I got a valdai copy, but it's not bad at all! I think i got lucky or something because i have no loose parts and the contrast is crazy good. I have some oil on the aperture blades but it's not splattering anywhere.
I recommend valdai if you are a cheapo like me and can risk 30 euros.

Great video. Thank you!

@TEMITAYOisME

Thnaks a lot.

I just bought a 44-2 with the Valdai symbom but the serial number is only 6 digits? Is this common?

If a Helios has the newest KMZ logo, will it still be good?

You are using the worst Helios 44-2. The logo in the lens defines the factory. Google "Helios KMZ". You want a KMZ factory lens. Yours is from a Valdai factory. Yes, they suck. I have a KMZ 44 and a 44-2. You can borrow them, pick them up in The Netherlands ;)

Thanks

helpful video

Very helpful! Merci!

Very very useful, and solid methodology. Would love to see more such lens reviews.

Does anyone know where can I find the 1965 KMZ version? I've been looking online and most posts selling these lenses don't have the date of production on their description. Thank you.

MMZ ?

Nice to accidentally lean that I have one of the better versions

dont understent who is better?

Thank you! Now I know 😊

Are the versions stated in the ads? Sellers should make you aware of which version they are selling. It seems that they don't so it will be hit or miss if you end up getting one or the other.

have 7-8 copies (silver 13blade 44, KMZ 44-2 prototypes, 44M prototypes, normal 44-2, 44m, 44m-4, ...) and would never say any of it's better than my Biotar from '50

White veil due to oily blades? That seems very unlikely. To my knowledge even impossible, but I might not know everything.The dirty irregular pattern inside the bokeh balls always indicates that one of the lens elements is damaged or very dirty, either by existing/previous fungus (etching) or some bad scuffs. This is what causes a white veil and significant loss of sharpness. I think your Valdai copy has damaged glass (and/or haze inside), would bet a round of beers on it. It's possible you'll only see this with a flashlight.

Hi Mathieu, do you have some suggest to obtain a swirly bokeh on a medium format? Thanks!

I have the inferior design.
I've used it extensively for photographic and documentary work when a certain look is needed and the imperfections just sing.

Were you able to focus at infinity with the silver version, and which adapters did you use, in that case? There's a slight difference in flange distance between the M39 and M42 versions.

why did you randomly put 2023 in the title when the video is from 2021? ah yes, for more clicks.

I have a 44M-4 and it's near perfect. Very solid build quality, oil free aperture blades, amazing image quality. It's made in 1990 in the Valdai plant.

I have a 'zebra' mmz 44-2 and it's my favourite lens. Plenty sharp enough when needed and absolutely beautiful bokeh. I use it on an m43 camera for flower shots.

I got one of these on an old zenit the other day for £4 the camera was broken though and I was about to chuck it away I’m glad I didn’t now from the looks of it I got the 70s version

Aloha, Mathieu!
Yes, I am a little late to the party...but, I recently purchased a Helios 44-2, Valdai-built, in 1983. 
(Near-mint condition from the Ukraine for $47USD total, shipped.)

But, I hadn't seen your video until today...
Anyway, this lens copy is, fortunately, very clean, clear and sharp(with an acceptable amount of sharpness loss toward the corners/edges). No wiggle in the mount. No oil on blades. Smooth focus and aperture rings. Nice color and contrast. Lovely bokeh...
-But I'm shooting it on a Lumix S5 full-frame camera...so I will eventually be fully exposed to all its characteristics: good, bad...and artsy...;)

So far, I really love the photos and video I have been getting. No complaints, actually. I wanted it to be a "characterful" lens...

I have almost every faster Takumar m42 and Canon FD lens between 15mm and 500mm. Amazing quality lenses...perfect for photos or cinematography... I have all of their fast 50mm's, including the 8-element Super Tak 50 f1.4, and the Canon 55 f1.2.
-But I wanted some lenses that I could "paint" a breathtaking photo with...and so have just been falling in love with these vintage Soviet-era lenses...

Compared to the Tak's and Canon FD's, this Valdai Helios 44-2 appears more "flare-prone"(even compared to the Super Tak), and so absolutely needs a long lens hood...and perhaps a very high-quality multi-coated Polarizer filter... Also, I am still getting used to the ergonomics of the focus and aperture locations of the Helios lenses... but already love the butter-smooth, click-less aperture...

It may not be the most reliable era for Valdai...but so far, so good...;)

Thank you for your great video's!

Is it true that the m39 silver mount has infinity focusing issues with mirrorless/DSLR? Seems like that’s not true based in the YT vid test. If compatible, which do I need to have two adapters? One m39 to m42 and m42 to EF mount?

I've had all versions, and you really never know what you're going to get. The character comes from quality problems in the first place, so it probably shouldn't be the motivation for buying any of these.

Its cuz the "original" version was actually the biotar, only assemeled in USSR out of annexed material from Carl Zeiss factories. After that they strted using their own crappy materials and production process.

I have 44-4. The difference is not that big

How about the MMZ version?

Great video, thank you! I bought the Valdai version a while back without really understanding the difference. This helps a lot.

Watch simon, there's not much difference.

Can I ask a noob question? How does oil on the blade make the vial on the image? is it reflecting light back into the front lens?

And what if there wasn't oil on the Valdai version? Would it be better?

🤙🏽

I enjoy Mathieu's innovative and sometimes crazy experiments. That said, I have to say that this particular test was poorly designed since the Valdai copy had obvious problems while the Helios 44 was pristine. I believe that the "bad" Valdai test results had all to do with that particular copy and the oil on its blades which can easily account for the hazy test results. I own 3 Valdai (2x44-2; 1x44M-4) and one KMZ (Helios 44; red dot). Unlike this test, all these lenses were in good shape without oil or play in their mechanicals. On my A7R5 they cannot be readily distinguished (even when pixel peeping at high magnifications). In particular, overall acutance, micro- and general contrast are identical. So just don't buy or accept copies that are beaten up or with obvious flaws such as oily blades or mechanical issues. The Helios 44 is not a complicated lens design to manufacture and it is also pretty rugged. Finally, the Helios 44 will not be the sharpest lens in your kit, even at that price point. It's is definitely sharp enough and its character and potential for swirly bokeh are what distinguish it from its peers.

I believe that if you find a well cared for copy -- Valdai or KMZ -- it will almost certainly be just fine. Newer versions -- 44M-4 and beyond will, in fact, have better coatings and may benefit from that with improved flair resistance and micro-contrast in some situations. Enjoy yours -- whatever version -- it is one of the best lens bargains you'll ever find in this life.

So which one is the best then?

So, the difference in results is due to the oil on the blades? Or are there differences with the glass elements themselves too?
I have 2 KMZ and 1 Valdai, the latter I cleaned on the outside today, and should soon take apart in order to clean the oil from the blades...

Thanks, I found a Valdai on Vinted, I won't buy it !

Back in the day the 44-2 was far from seen as being desirable. I nearly junked mine when my Zenit was relegated to the loft. I moved on to shooting a Pentax ME-Super and didn't ever consider the KMZ until getting my Canon 5d many years later. I'm pleased to find I have one of the better versions, it certainly is a lens I've come to love for its character when it's a choice rather than an imposition.

I've bought VALDAI version for 1000 rubles (don't convert) with m42-nex adapter. It is in a moderate condition. Like, little bit of scratches, oily diaphragm, wear of painting, old grease. I've took apart it and drowned diaphragm in alcohol, changed old grase to cyatim (yes, freezing lube in cold country). After i've put it back together i got 9$ lens. I think it worth it, huh? For me it not main lens, my main - helios-44m-7 MC, it sharp as hell. 44-2 was bought as "that one soft, blury, portret one".

Thanks!

What if clean the oil from blades? Must be realy hard to do that... for example the shop who send it to you....