Helios 44 - opinions?

[lost cat]

Thank you Igor, that is good information. (edit) and for the update :)

 

Yes I was referring to the brand, not necessarily the mount. And thank you for the correction Andrea, I will try to be careful with my nomenclature.

[Andrea B.]

Exaktar is a brand, not a mount. (Whereas Exakta, without the r, is the mount).

 

Aaaaaaand ------ Exacta (Ihagee) made a few some Exaktar lenses. In which case Exacta is the brand name and Exaktar is the lens model name. (I have a 50/2.0 Exacta Exaktar around here somewhere that I got in a lot purchase. Although I don't recall how it is labeled.) Other companies also made Exaktar lenses.

You could go a little crazy trying to sort it all out!! :D

[lost cat]

Well I just bit the bullet and bought a Helios 44-2 Zebra. I figured at a whopping $0.10+ shipping it was worth a shot

 

Also picked up a pair of vintage Tower 51 cameras with Steinheil Cassar S 50/2.8 lenses. Anyone have experiences to share with these?

[Andrea B.]

Only 10 cents ?? That's wild !!

[igoriginal]

Exaktar is a brand, not a mount. (Whereas Exakta, without the r, is the mount).

 

Aaaaaaand ------ Exacta (Ihagee) made a few some Exaktar lenses. In which case Exacta is the brand name and Exaktar is the lens model name. (I have a 50/2.0 Exacta Exaktar around here somewhere that I got in a lot purchase. Although I don't recall how it is labeled.) Other companies also made Exaktar lenses.

You could go a little crazy trying to sort it all out!! :D

 

And to get even more crazy, multiple camera models with this mount were made under both, the EXA and Exakta names... in which case, referring to this mount with both names combined into a hybrid name (EXA Exakta mount), or either of the names by themselves (EXA mount only, or Exakta mount only) would equally suffice from that point on.

 

Errrgggg. NOW my head is about to start hurting. Haha.

[lost cat]

Only 10 cents ?? That's wild !!

 

Yep, a whole whopping dime, plus shipping. We'll see if the lens was worth it.

[igoriginal]

Only 10 cents ?? That's wild !!

 

Yeah. That's what I thought, too.

 

What luck, Lost Cat! Congrats!

 

I've nailed a few like that, because of being lucky enough to end up as the sole bidder on a lens ... but I've always asked (through an Ebay message to the seller, immediately after the auction end), to adjust my invoice and add a few extra dollars to the total invoice before I made my payment to the seller. This is because I felt that the seller deserved more for the lens, whenever that was the case, and I didn't want to exploit them with such a crazy win.

 

Talk about having a guilty conscience, huh? (Example: I once nailed a Kyoei 35mm F/3.5 "clone" for a mere $2.99, at auction end. This was an "NOS" - or "new old stock" lens - never used, and still in its original box! It was a mint-condition, straight-off-the-shelf Galaxy 35mm F/3.5, one of the better-known Kyoei clones. So, I asked the seller to add $7.01 to my invoice, to make it an even $10, plus whatever the shipping cost was.) It's the least I can do, but I STILL walk out with a great deal, though.

 

(You should have seen the message I got back, by the way. The seller was floored. Heheh. Ten years of Ebay auctions, and it was the first time he ever heard if an auction winner voluntarily OFFERING him more money, at the end of an auction. I really LIKE doing that to people. It feels good. :) :) :) )

 

But, then, this only pertains mostly to auctions, and mostly to unusually pristine and/or exceptionally choice items that the seller is probably ignorant of their true potential value.

 

As for "buy-it-out" offerings, that's a whole different ball-game, in which case I become suspicious of unusually low prices on an item that shouldn't be so low ... and therefore expect to receive something that is probably going to fall under the "for parts / repair / as is" bin. In other words, I curb my expectations in such cases (although I still take such risks, because I have gotten quite good at lens restoration, after working on over 500 lenses now, for the past 4 years). I have about 106 Kyoei clones, alone, and still amassing.

 

Can you say OBSESSION???

[lost cat]

Yeah. That's what I thought, too.

 

What luck, Lost Cat! Congrats!

 

I've nailed a few like that, because of being lucky enough to end up as the sole bidder on a lens ... but I've always asked (through an Ebay message to the seller, immediately after the auction end), to adjust my invoice and add a few extra dollars to the total invoice before I made my payment to the seller. This is because I felt that the seller deserved more for the lens, whenever that was the case, and I didn't want to exploit them with such a crazy win.

 

Talk about having a guilty conscience, huh? (Example: I once nailed a Kyoei 35mm F/3.5 "clone" for a mere $2.99, at auction end. This was an "NOS" - or "new old stock" lens - never used, and still in its original box! It was a mint-condition, straight-off-the-shelf Galaxy 35mm F/3.5, one of the better-known Kyoei clones. So, I asked the seller to add $7.01 to my invoice, to make it an even $10, plus whatever the shipping cost was.) It's the least I can do, but I STILL walk out with a great deal, though.

 

(You should have seen the message I got back, by the way. The seller was floored. Heheh. Ten years of Ebay auctions, and it was the first time he ever heard if an auction winner voluntarily OFFERING him more money, at the end of an auction. I really LIKE doing that to people. It feels good. :) :) :) )

 

But, then, this only pertains to auctions. As for "buy-it-out" offerings, that's a whole different ball-game, in which case I become suspicious of unusually low prices on an item that shouldn't be so low ... and therefore expect to receive something that is probably going to fall under the "for parts / repair / as is" bin. In other words, I curb my expectations in such cases (although I still take such risks, because I have gotten quite good at lens restoration, after working on over 500 lenses now, for the past 4 years). I have about 106 Kyoei clones, alone, and still amassing.

 

Can you say OBSESSION???

 

Classy :)

 

Belated congrats on your Galaxy lens. Wanna trade? ;)

 

Then again who knows. Perhaps the Helios will turn out to be a decent performer in the UV after all.

[igoriginal]

Classy :)

 

Belated congrats on your Galaxy lens. Wanna trade? ;)

 

Then again who knows. Perhaps the Helios will turn out to be a decent performer in the UV after all.

 

Thanks, LC.

 

You never know, with older lenses. For instance, coatings could sometimes be rubbed off or worn out, in which case UV transmission may (or may not) be somewhat improved. There could be other anomalies (such as inconsistent batches, during production).

 

(Though I have no experience with the Helios which you obtained, so I am not sure that the stripping of coatings would matter or not. Especially if there is any UV-opaque cementing still inside the lens.)

 

As for "trading", I'm always open to bartering. Of course, I am planning to soon open my own UV-lens store (on Ebay), this coming Spring of 2016. (Not trying to solicit on here, by the way, but just stating this while we are on the subject). This is precisely why I've been amassing UV-capable lenses of all focal lengths and aperture ranges, as well as restoring those that needed work, thus adding them to my planned-to-sell stockpile. And I refuse to be a price-gouger, so I will be most reasonable with my offerings. Thus, I'll just keep you in the loop. (Message me, if you want to stay in contact). Or, like you suggested, there's also the option of barter or trade, if we have mutual interest of some of the other person's items. We can talk more on this, in a message, so as to not hijack this thread.

 

It's been a pleasure to have conversed with you, by the way. I am glad that UVP has gained yet another interesting member. :)

[igoriginal]

By the way, I have about 14 copies of the Galaxy-branded Kyoei clone, thus far, so I can surely spare a few (or more). Haha.

[lost cat]

Thanks, LC.

 

You never know, with older lenses. For instance, coatings could sometimes be rubbed off or worn out, in which case UV transmission may (or may not) be somewhat improved. There could be other anomalies (such as inconsistent batches, during production).

 

(Though I have no experience with the Helios which you obtained, so I am not sure that the stripping of coatings would matter or not. Especially if there is any UV-opaque cementing still inside the lens.)

 

As for "trading", I'm always open to bartering. Of course, I am planning to soon open my own UV-lens store (on Ebay), this coming Spring of 2016. (Not trying to solicit on here, by the way, but just stating this while we are on the subject). This is precisely why I've been amassing UV-capable lenses of all focal lengths and aperture ranges, as well as restoring those that needed work, thus adding them to my planned-to-sell stockpile. And I refuse to be a price-gouger, so I will be most reasonable with my offerings. Thus, I'll just keep you in the loop. (Message me, if you want to stay in contact). Or, like you suggested, there's also the option of barter or trade, if we have mutual interest of some of the other person's items. We can talk more on this, in a message, so as to not hijack this thread.

 

It's been a pleasure to have conversed with you, by the way. I am glad that UVP has gained yet another interesting member. :)

 

Thanks. A pleasure for me as well. I hope your new endeavor is a success.

[Alex H]

Also picked up a pair of vintage Tower 51 cameras with Steinheil Cassar S 50/2.8 lenses. Anyone have experiences to share with these?

 

Since Tower 51 is a rangefinder with integrated lens, you will have to take it apart to get the lens. This camera was originally manufactured under the name Iloca Rapid B, and here are disassembly instructions: http://pheugo.com/cameras/index.php?page=rapidb I am not sure if it has separate diaphragm mechanism, or if the shutter mechanism is responsible both for exposure and aperture (many leaf shutters do). You will have to check this out on your own, but do not be surprised if you end up using this lens wide open only.

 

Cassar is a triplet, and some Cassars made for SLR (in M42 and Exakta mounts) and rangefinder (with interchangeable lenses like Braun Paxette) were tested and found to be good for UV (listed in the stickies). I would expect yours to perform similarly good. You will not be able to use it at infinity on your Nikon camera though.

[lost cat]

Since Tower 51 is a rangefinder with integrated lens, you will have to take it apart to get the lens. This camera was originally manufactured under the name Iloca Rapid B, and here are disassembly instructions: http://pheugo.com/ca...php?page=rapidb I am not sure if it has separate diaphragm mechanism, or if the shutter mechanism is responsible both for exposure and aperture (many leaf shutters do). You will have to check this out on your own, but do not be surprised if you end up using this lens wide open only.

 

Cassar is a triplet, and some Cassars made for SLR (in M42 and Exakta mounts) and rangefinder (with interchangeable lenses like Braun Paxette) were tested and found to be good for UV (listed in the stickies). I would expect yours to perform similarly good. You will not be able to use it at infinity on your Nikon camera though.

 

Thank you for the links. Truth be told I hadn't considered these lenses to be so integrated into the camera.

 

I had looked into the camera and saw the Tower 51 had also come equipped with an ISCO Gottingen Westar 2.8/50 lens on the same Prontor SVS shutter. I assumed the lenses were modular like the modern cameras/kit lenses I am used to. Doh!

 

Looks like this may be a more "interesting" project than I had expected.

[Alex H]

That is why I said - decide on the exact focal length that you want to add to your kit, and then ask here for suggestions. It will save you some money.

 

Also, when taking these cameras apart, do not discard any screws - very soon you will be in the situation when you loose one vitally important and very tiny screw, and will need to find a replacement. I have a whole box of such screws from dozens of cameras and lenses I took apart in the past, and still, there are times when I can not find a suitable substitute for repair job...

[igoriginal]

I have a whole box of such screws from dozens of cameras and lenses I took apart in the past, and still, there are times when I can not find a suitable substitute for repair job...

 

Haha! You think like me, Alex.

 

I save all of my screws. I even remove all the screws off of any object that I throw out. (I scavenge the screws. I completely pick the item bare). Especially those tiny micro-screws used on many of the vintage/legacy lenses, and these screws cannot be found anywhere else.

 

So, I have been building a micro-screw collection, of all shapes and sizes. You never know when a repair job would require an adapted screw from a different object, yet matches the threading and/or length of the screw to a sufficient degree to get the job done.

[lost cat]

That is why I said - decide on the exact focal length that you want to add to your kit, and then ask here for suggestions. It will save you some money.

 

Also, when taking these cameras apart, do not discard any screws - very soon you will be in the situation when you loose one vitally important and very tiny screw, and will need to find a replacement. I have a whole box of such screws from dozens of cameras and lenses I took apart in the past, and still, there are times when I can not find a suitable substitute for repair job...

 

Yes, point taken; however if this does turn out to be a mistake its not a horrendously expensive one. Buying a house at the peak of a real estate bubble, now THAT's expensive!

 

And yes, I always try to keep the small, random bits, especially fasteners. Good advice.

[Alex H]

however if this does turn out to be a mistake its not a horrendously expensive one.

 

That is just the beginning...

;)

[lost cat]

That is just the beginning...

;)

 

As well as all that time lost to yak shaving.

[lost cat]

Hi Jim

The Helios, 44M-4, f2 / 58mm, metal body, rated #3 on my test bed, but it was a poor third, for UV transmittance of 365nm.

This lens has proven to be a poor UV performer & the cement fluoresces.

Having said that, I haven't used it for a while & I have now got a Bayer CFA camera, Panasonic G3 that is full spectrum.

It has a minimum focus of 0.5m, & the filter thread is 52mm.

Mine has a logo, that is a trapezoid with a stylized birds wings like this....http://jonasraskphotography.com/2013/05/17/helios-44m-4-58mm-f2-review/

Maybe I should revisit it again :D

Col

 

FYI that symbol is a dove prism:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dove_prism

 

I received my Helios 44/2. SN 70xxxxx. Its an early 1970s vintage with zebra barrel produced by MMZ/Belomo. As a first pass I put it under my fluorescent BLB to check for fluorescence and yes, there is quite a bit of green fluorescence. I also tested an Industar 50/3.5 (chrome barrel) in the same manner. I see a bit of fluorescence in the rearmost element under the BLB in this lens as well. As a control I also tested my Revue 35/3/5 Enna clone. I am able to detect a bit of fluorescence from the rearmost element even on this lens, about the same as the Industar.

 

Not having a copy of the CZ Biotar from the sticky I can't say if the fluorescence is any better or worse.

[Andrea B.]

We don't have a specific table in the Lens Sticky for lenses not good for UV, so I'll have to think about how to list this info about Helios44/2, Industar 50/3.5 and Revue 35/3.5. Perhaps I'll just place them alphabetically along with the others but add a "fluoresces, not good" comment.

[lost cat]

We don't have a specific table in the Lens Sticky for lenses not good for UV, so I'll have to think about how to list this info about Helios44/2, Industar 50/3.5 and Revue 35/3.5. Perhaps I'll just place them alphabetically along with the others but add a "fluoresces, not good" comment.

 

The Revue is one of the old bakelite Enna Munchen Ennalyt 35/3.5 clones:

 

http://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php/topic/1602-the-enna-munchen-ennalyt-clones/

 

The fluorescence is low but noticeable. Even so it's supposedly very good for UV down to 325 nm.

 

The CZ Biotar and Tessar on which the Helios and Industar are based are both listed as good for UV. Since both have just as many cemented elements as their Soviet brethren I am not sure it's time to pass judgement just yet. At least based on this observation.

 

Unfortunately I do not have a filter panel (or a gold standard spectrophotometer) with which to perform more rigorous tests. The best I may be able to offer is a relative performance test benchmarked to a couple of other lenses.

 

 

[Andrea B.]

Jim, the "bottom line" has always been that if you can make a good UV photograph of a subject with known UV characteristics and observe those UV characteristics in the photo, then the lens works well enough for UV photography. :D We welcome any and all demonstrations of how a lens performs - most especially photographs made with that lens.

 

And as I recently mentioned somewhere, there are other characteristics of a lens which should be discovered to assess its usefulness.

 

In the winter, sunflowers may be purchased in grocery stores flower sections. The sunflower is a good UV subject because it has the bulls-eye pattern in UV. The bulls-eye may be bigger or smaller depending on the particular sunflower variety. On a sunny winter day, test exposures can be made outdoors even though there would be less UV than usual. Or if you have some kind of UV illumination, the test exposures can be made indoors.

 

I think I have a CZ Tessar somewhere. Will try to find it and shine the UV torch into it and see if I note any fluorescence.

[lost cat]

Yeah. That's what I thought, too.

I once nailed a Kyoei 35mm F/3.5 "clone" for a mere $2.99, at auction end. This was an "NOS" - or "new old stock" lens - never used, and still in its original box! It was a mint-condition, straight-off-the-shelf Galaxy 35mm F/3.5, one of the better-known Kyoei clones.

 

Ironically enough I also just nailed a Kyoei 35mm F/3.5 "clone" for a mere ~$7 (plus shipping), at auction end. This was still in its original box! It was a near mint-condition, who knows it might even be a straight-off-the-shelf Galaxy 35mm F/3.5, one of the better-known Kyoei clones.

 

 

:D :D :D

[SteveCampbell]

Early 13-blade Helios 44 on the way. Hopefully will perform better than later, coated models, but if not, at least it has that sweet portrait bokeh. Will report when it arrives ...

[Dmitry]

I had 7 copies of Industar-50, five of them same M42 mount. They all have different cement fluorescence. Best copy can reach 360nm according to my solar spectrum tests.