| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Vlad |
Posted - Nov 11 2018 : 11:54:26 AM
How did this Korean Sirius 135 get a KMZ logo on it? Seems like TOE London was doing some very interesting branding...
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/11112018_N__PQYChJyA.jpg
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/11112018_yH-DBVMk5D0.jpg
|
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Vlad |
Posted - Dec 14 2018 : 1:46:42 PM
Juhani, I respectfully disagree, it IS fake. using KMZ logo is a violation of copyright.. I can probably live with Helios name being used but putting another factory's logo on a lens that wasn't theirs is technically counterfeiting. I agree with Zoom..
Best regards,
Vlad |
| cedricfan |
Posted - Nov 22 2018 : 10:27:59 AM
We may think that the Soviet lenses were great, but when ttl-metering came to Zenit, the preset-lenses became very clumsy for the laymen.
Also there was no 28mm wide angle, which was a standard addition to a lens combo of normal & 135mm tele.
Even worse it became when zooms got popular! Nothing even close...
So yes, I can fully understand why TOE added these re-branded lenses to their range, and calling them Helios made them easy to sell with Zenit :)
Best regards,
Juhani |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 22 2018 : 09:42:37 AM
OK, Juhani. Thanks.
A problem of word, as often...
Jacques. |
| cedricfan |
Posted - Nov 21 2018 : 10:23:13 PM
Don't say "fake", but "house brand", and you understand why.
Give customer what he needs, all of it, for correct price and quality.
Best regards,
Juhani |
| Jacques M. |
Posted - Nov 21 2018 : 3:21:21 PM
I wonder what is the added value to "fake" such a lens. And what is the original lens which was faked?
Jacques; |
| Zoom |
Posted - Nov 21 2018 : 2:27:15 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Vlad
Did KMZ officially license this I wonder?
Of course not. This is called counterfeit. |
| Guido |
Posted - Nov 11 2018 : 5:43:56 PM
Hello all
Well, I have a problem too with the KMZ logo. The S/N of my Helios-44 lenses are all 7- or 8-digits, only some very early lenses had 6-digit numbers. The Helios-44-7 (00xxxx) are exeptions, a Helios-44M (05xxxx) and a Helios-44M (83xxxx) had only 6-digit numbers as far I can say about short digit numbers. My best guess is your copies aren't original from KMZ. Probably.
It's no Helios in my collection without the "-44" prefix by the way. And all my Helios-44 are 2.0/58mm and I don't have any 2.8/135mm.
Best wishes - Guido
|
| Vlad |
Posted - Nov 11 2018 : 3:55:09 PM
Still really strange why it required a KMZ logo... |
| cedricfan |
Posted - Nov 11 2018 : 2:22:37 PM
I think TOE was far too valuable, and too close to KMZ for anyone to say no, when extra lenses was needed.
And as "UK only", it would not have influenced other markets.
What I remember from Finland is that the USSR lenses were a true rarity, only MTO was really available. Jupiter-135mm sometimes advertised, but rarely sold.
Best regards,
Juhani |
| Vlad |
Posted - Nov 11 2018 : 2:13:20 PM
Hi Juhani!
I've seen TOE Helioses before but this is the first time I actually see a KMZ logo on it.. wow you have one too! Incredible! Did KMZ officially license this I wonder? I didn't see any mention of these lenses on zenitcamera.com, although I may have missed it... thanks for this additional info!
Cheers,
Vlad |
| cedricfan |
Posted - Nov 11 2018 : 2:03:11 PM
Most likely, they did plenty of these, and most likely one of these in my picture come from same source...
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/11112018_Helios M42.JPG
Best regards,
Juhani |
