Yep, that looks as fake as it gets. Lovely brand new packaging for a lens with clear wear. And since when did KMZ ever make a 44m7?
Funny. They even managed to use three different names for the lens – one on the front plate, 2nd one on the box, and 3rd one on the product manual.
I think that we only have ourselves to blame. The basic lens itself is a quite good perfomer and came in a huge number of models. As millions were made they were cheap and good value. To put an M7 on a pedestal as something very special is only to invite a higher price for it (and a bit of faking).
The M5, M6 and M7 are all hand selected versions of the same lens presumably tested for ground resolution quality at assembly - or maybe they came off lens grinding machines that were achieving higher tolerances - maybe just using the fact that the lens grinding machines were getting old and worn and some were performaing better than others.
For the later made lenses there can be no external differences in build. The main issue of this old and lengthy thread is on whether or not there ever were some earlier M7 lenses made. This gives a huge area of doubt and even if posisble just when did the “M7” labelling start. As the issue is fraught I think that only the very late “M7” can be considered “genuine” and I accept this theory even though I think that in actual fact the practice started at some earlier date.
Some very earlier re-named faceplate lenses must be fakes but an element of doubt cannot fruitfully exclude the possibility that there was a renaming going on before it became official policy. But even if they were fakes the lenses are still quite good performer and we are not in a position to see the precise image performance improvement of a “genuine” M7 over a “fake” M7.
I bought a few of these lenses before the “M7” became regarded as something “more special”. In those days the “M7” was sellng at much the same price as others - there was no price premium charged. The only thing that the fake “M7” label would guarantee a vedor was that “his” M7 might be a trifle easier to sell in the vast number of H-44 lenses on offer.
As a result I have a few early “M7 fakes” that may of may not be fakes and in reality might just be a hand-picking of higher resolution lenses before the production of them became a more official policy.
I am reconciled to mine being fakes in the absence of being able to test the resolution myself. But they still perform veyr well - and I am a bit perplexed at the seeming need to go to the trouble of re-labelling these lenses when they did not sell for any premium in price. A sort of need perhaps for a Russian form of lens grafitti?
Simply done “because they can”?
I did buy a later “suite” of M5, M6, M7 that came in a single lot from a Russian vendor in perfect condition that I believe are all genuine.
