I own two of those, they are both M42 mount and close up to f/16 though. It is by no means a "clinical" lens that'll give you a sharp and clean image, but they have a nice character which I find quite cinematic. I personally use them as taking lenses for anamorphic.

You can find a butt-load of footage shot with that lens on vimeo: https://vimeo.com/search?q=Helios+M44.

Good lens. I use the 'Fotga' M42 adapter from China and it works fine. They can easily be found on ebay with free shipping.

well if you can show any other lens that is as sharp as this one totally open(f2) would be very nice...especially for its price(next to nothing) This lens has more character then the whole panasonic range of lenses(cold clinical look) for the lumix combined ; ) just a subjective opinion of course(we are talking characters)

@Diffusion33 f22 are you sure? do you have some pictures of it? As far as adapter usually they come in m42 mount but there also pentax ,etc.

Vivitar is f2.8? And price is a few times more at least. Rokkor is 1.4 and the bokeh will be for sure more dramatic. But yesh all of them are good for different things.

I am happy with my second c-mount adapter.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150676333283

made by Big_in

I even bought their m42 mount for a Helios 44.

It has a tiny screw so you can adjust the ring.

And it was cheap.

Earlier versions of the rokkor 58/1.4 have more aperture blades. If you can find a 58/1.4/8 blade "auto", that is good for bokeh and hopefully won't glow in the dark. There are different numbers of aperture blades for the Helios as well--check the number before buying. More blades=smoother bokeh, usually. Neither the 58 1.2 nor the 58 1.4 is as sharp as the good batches of 50/1.4, and neither of those is as sharp as the Olly 45. But they are sharp enough for video! I actually do not like the color on the older 58 minoltas as much as the the 50mm ones, and they don't have the special 3D quality. But the Bokeh is awesome. The older ones, especially the 58 f1.2, have a radioactive coating that breaks down adds a color cast to the lens. It is worth noting that the prized bokeh on the 58's (Rokkor) does not kick in till you stop them down just a bit, and you can see why if you look at the way the aperture blades work. I believe that the contrast is a bit better on the 58/1.2 vs 58/1.4. However, some would argue that lower contrast allows you greater dynamic range in post. Seems crazy, but there it is. I think that is true if the color is good and the contrast meets a certain threshold so it can be "pushed". I'll try to do an AB on the Bokeh ofthe Helios and post it. It is good.

hmmmm you are right, the prices have gone way up on the 55mm since I bought mine. Guess I should sell my old lenses! The 55 tests sharper on MTF tests, it isn't just subjective. The thing is, for video it only has to be sharp enough--it isn't a high resolution medium. If the lens is too sharp, you can even get ugly artifacts. The Helios, Rokkor and Vivitar 55mm all have nice sharpness and Bokeh. Not a big difference, just a small one.

Probably the early KMZ Helios with the 13 blade aperture and F22 http://forum.mflenses.com/complete-list-of-helios-lenses-getting-closer-t26100.html Would love to see the Bokeh on that one with all those blades. Curious if the serial begins with zeros. I agree about perception, and I perceive the Vivitar is sharper!