Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh
"Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank
"Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh
Back in the 1960s, Consumer Reports magazine declared that Miranda Sensorex was the “best buy for the money.” Their declaration had a great influence on my decision to select the Sensorex as my first SLR. However, my Sensorex broke three times within the first two years of its three-year warranty. The third time it broke was when I was hundreds of feet in the air covering the maiden voyage of a new aircraft that the local university had just acquired. Thank goodness a backup twin-lens reflex camera that I carried allowed me to complete my assignment.
The other photographers at the newspaper where I worked used Nikons and convinced me that Nikons had the reliability that I needed. I immediately replaced my broken Sensorex with a used Nikon F. I have been using Nikons ever since because I have been very impressed with the dependability and ruggedness of their bodies and lenses.
My horrible experiences with my brand new Miranda Sensorex convinced me that it was and is a bad camera. I would not recommend it to anyone.
AIC produced Mirandas and Soligar until about 77 or 78 then closed, the brand name was sold and rebranded Cosina's were sold under the Miranda label, the K mounts were not the AIC models.
Originally Posted by werra
I don't know if I would put Miranda in the budget group. The Sensorex cameras were very advanced and very expensive when they came out. Miranda also had one of the largest lens line ups, from I believe, 17mm to 500mm. Prior the introduction of the Nikon F, the Miranda was Japan's "pro" SLR, and even for a couple years after Miranda competed with Nikon. When Nikon came out with the 21mm lens (which needed MLU to work) Miranda came out with the 17mm lens the next year - and it worked with reflex focussing!
However Miranda was a small company, never made their own lenses, etc. etc. - IIRC Soligor bought them up in 1968 or 69, and managed to kill the whole operation in less than a decade (apparently through gross mismanagement).[/QUOTE]
Mirdands lens were made by a number of companies, Kowa was one, I think Tonkia was another. Lens were disigned by Miranda. As a collecter I would like to see any data about the lens line up. The lens listed in the cataglogs was limited, for EE 25mm to 200 the Sesnorex 25 to 300mm. I have seen a few 400mm and 500mm thrid party lens with the 44mm screw mount, Mirdanda had both the baynet(sp?) and a 44 screw mount, but 44 mm lens dont couple to the meter. AIC bought both Mirdanda and Soligor. AIC was an American owned company. The owner of Brookland Camera told me that AIC did not get tax breaks and other considerdations given to Nikon and other Japaness based companies and could not keep up with tech evolution of the late 70s. Dont know how much truth there is to his story.
My favorite camera is a Miranda D. Shutter speeds were still dead on when I got it. I had a much later Sensomat that would sometimes jam up for no apparent reason though. I think reliability may have dropped off after Soligor acquired the company in the late 60s.
Originally Posted by narsuitus
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
You can find every Miranda lens known on this Japanese site, listed in rough chronological order: http://miranda.s32.xrea.com/miranda/MSJ_html/lens/ Miranda had many manufacturers make lenses for them. Mostly Kowa and Tokina as you mentioned, but also companies like Norita and Zunow.
Originally Posted by PDH
Last edited by E. von Hoegh; 10-18-2012 at 05:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Thanks for the link, the catalogs I have do not the 17mm, 21mm, 85mm or 400mm, I dont think I have see any of these on auction sites.
Originally Posted by Yashinoff
The trouble with central shutter is the fact that it greatly interferes with the optical design of the lens and is somewhat a limitation in that matter compared to a focal plane shutter. This and their allergy to high speed are for me their main drawbacks. But well designed, they are surprisingly durable, silent and without syncho speed limitation. They also have an edge on the maintenance aspect compare to focal plane shutters which are most of the time embedded into the camera body.
Originally Posted by David Lyga
For your question about curtains, I vote for metal: no crack, no pinhole.
How so? In most lenses with central shutters, the shutter is directly in front of/behind the aperture. Some even use one diaphragm for both functions.
Originally Posted by Dali
From an optical perspective, a lens with and without a central shutter are basically identical.
Examples of this are large-format lenses, whose cells are routinely used in both barrels and shutters without any optical modifications at all.
The camera is the most incidental element of photography.