Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Miranda lenses, any good?

1,794 views
Skip to first unread message

Vaporman

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 11:36:17 AM2/16/01
to
Does anyone have an opinion/experience with Miranda brand lenses?
I am considering a 28mm Auto Miranda lens, I'm mostly concerned
about flare, I don't think it is Multi-coated.
Thanks

ArtKramr

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 11:42:58 AM2/16/01
to
>Subject: Miranda lenses, any good?
>From: vapo...@aol.com (Vaporman)
>Date: 2/16/01 8:36 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <20010216113617...@ng-mf1.aol.com>


In my experience the Miranda lenses were always quite good. I assume you have a
Miranda camera therefore you have no choice but to get a Miranda lens. Right?
Get the lens and enjoy it.

Arthur Kramer
Las Vegas NV

Vaporman

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 12:17:54 PM2/16/01
to
<< In my experience the Miranda lenses were always quite good. I assume you
have a
Miranda camera therefore you have no choice but to get a Miranda lens. Right?
Get the lens and enjoy it.
>>


Actually the lens is a screw mount.

Nicholas O. Lindan

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 1:59:15 PM2/16/01
to Vaporman
Vaporman wrote:
>
> Actually the lens is a screw mount.

That's an oldie then. Is it Miranda branded, or just a Miranda mount?

I used a Miranda (well, Soligor) 28mm and shot into the sun without problems.
They are quite good lenses.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio noli...@ix.netcom.com
Technical Management Consulting & Engineering Services:
New Product Development; Electrical Engineering;
Software, System and Circuit Design. Oh, & Photography

mcsalty

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 3:37:30 PM2/16/01
to
I own a Miranda 28mm Olympus fit. I am more than happy with it. Its an f2.8
and is multicoated. I believe they made the same lens available for several
mounts, and mine was £20 ($30), and has even survived being dropped twice
with no damage (that I saw). I have a pic taken with it here:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=149003
its not the greatest example really, but it's all ive got scanned...


Vaporman

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 4:13:47 PM2/16/01
to
<< I own a Miranda 28mm Olympus fit. I am more than happy with it. Its an f2.8
and is multicoated. I believe they made the same lens available for several
mounts, and mine was £20 ($30), and has even survived being dropped twice
with no damage (that I saw). I have a pic taken with it here: >>

That's very good, thanks!


Art Begun

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 5:28:15 PM2/16/01
to
Miranda used to make 35 mm cameras but went belly up many
years ago. Most lenses were made my soligor for them.
Since that time the Miranda name has been used as a label
for other makes, mostly in Europe.

"Vaporman" <vapo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010216161347...@ng-mf1.aol.com...

Tony Polson

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 5:58:27 PM2/16/01
to
vapo...@aol.com (Vaporman) wrote:

If you have a Miranda camera with the Miranda screw mount (looks like
the Pentax M42 thread but it's not the same thread) you have a very
restricted choice of lenses. Unless you can find a Tamron Adaptall 2
mount or T mount for Miranda, or an adapter to take other lens mounts,
you are stuck with the lenses that were originally made for the camera.

By the standards of the 1960s/70s Miranda's lens range was barely
acceptable and by today's standards they are poor. The only Miranda
lens that had a good reputation was a standard lens (~ 50mm) made by
Soligor. That lens may have given the impression that Miranda cameras
came with good lenses, alas the others in the range were not of that
quality.

After the Japanese Miranda company went bust the US importer of Miranda
cameras financed ongoing production so they wouldn't go bust themselves.
Later the Miranda brand was sold to the Dixons Group of the UK and
various "Miranda" lenses and accessories were made in several Japanese
factories in a number of camera mounts, but strangely not Miranda's own.

The main interest in Miranda cameras and lenses comes from collectors,
and the pleasure of these not unattractive cameras comes from enjoying
ownership rather than their high optical standards.

--
Tony Polson

mcsalty

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 6:30:20 PM2/16/01
to
wow.... you know, I was searching for Miranda lenses on Ask Jeeves a few
weeks back (looking to see if they made ultrawides) when I saw a whole load
of similar information. I don't know HOW similar, I just remember the bit
about dixons and about collectors wanting them rather than people who use
them.

copy and paste job, Tony?

Tony Polson <tony....@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:ljbr8tkmimqkdinbk...@4ax.com...

Tony Polson

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 6:59:55 PM2/16/01
to
"mcsalty" <mcs...@ic24.net> wrote:

> wow.... you know, I was searching for Miranda lenses on Ask Jeeves a few
> weeks back (looking to see if they made ultrawides) when I saw a whole load
> of similar information. I don't know HOW similar, I just remember the bit
> about dixons and about collectors wanting them rather than people who use
> them.
>
> copy and paste job, Tony?

No, just a photographic memory!

:-)

--
Tony Polson

ArtKramr

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 7:27:12 PM2/16/01
to
>Subject: Re: Miranda lenses, any good?
>From: "mcsalty" mcs...@ic24.net
>Date: 2/16/01 3:30 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <IKij6.3596$Cq.31858@news2-hme0>
>

>Miranda lenses on Ask Jeeves a few
>weeks back (looking to see if they made ultrawides) when I saw a whole load
>of similar information. I don't know HOW similar, I just remember the bit
>about dixons and about collectors wanting them rather than people who use
>them.

>copy and paste job, Tony?

A photograph I did with a Miranda years ago ended up in the permanent
collection of the Museum of Modern Art in New York. The lenses were fine.

Vaporman

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 7:57:25 PM2/16/01
to
Thanks VERY much Tony. I was thinking the Miranda lens was an M42 mount.

Tony Polson

unread,
Feb 16, 2001, 8:26:13 PM2/16/01
to
vapo...@aol.com (Vaporman) wrote:

> Thanks VERY much Tony. I was thinking the Miranda lens was an M42 mount.

You're welcome.

--
Tony Polson

Art Begun

unread,
Feb 22, 2001, 2:51:54 AM2/22/01
to
I agree. The cameras were nice too except for their major
mess DX3. I happen to have a functioning DX3. One of few
I'm sure.

"ArtKramr" <artk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010216192712...@ng-ma1.aol.com...

Maycop

unread,
Feb 22, 2001, 7:40:52 AM2/22/01
to
I was told by the Canadian distributor in Toronto that the DX3 was the major
reason for the demise of the line. The lenses were fine. I have a 52mm macro
that I would'nt part w/for anything. Use it all the time for duping
slides/internegs.
Don

John Bateson

unread,
Feb 23, 2001, 4:10:10 PM2/23/01
to
Actually, Miranda didn't make any lenses. Miranda was owned in its later
years by Allied Impex Corp. who also owned the Soligor brand name. That is
why you will find Miranda lenses which have the Miranda-Soligor name. Only
the latest Miranda lenses came with multicoating, since the company did
survive until the late '70s by which time multicoating was an industry
standard. But, otherwise, Miranda was known more for it's camera designs
than it's optical output.
John Bateson

--
-----------------------------------------------------
Click here for Free Video!!
http://www.gohip.com/free_video/

"Eric Freibrun" <efre...@NOSPAM.msn.com> wrote in message
news:erYxl7JmAHA.359@cpmsnbbsa07...
> To those who appreciate Miranda, I have an Fv with 50mm f1.9 Auto Miranda
> lens (bayonet mount) up for auction on ebay at
> http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1215235183.
Thanks,
> Eric Freibrun


>
> "Tony Polson" <tony....@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:ljbr8tkmimqkdinbk...@4ax.com...

0 new messages