Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Mir Lenses - what are the exact differences & advantages
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:34 am    Post subject: Mir Lenses - what are the exact differences & advantages Reply with quote
I've been reading a lot about Mir lenses and I'm about to pull the trigger on one (maybe two?), but there are so many variations, so i'm a bit confused.

MIR-24 - There's an M & H mount for M42 and Nikon, but they look completely different. Is there anything that's optically different. Does one have an advantage over the other?

MIR-1 - I found the original MIR-1 & MIR-1B(V). I've read the original is better - is that true? I've seen different variations of this lens, but is there a preferred version that performs the best?

Do you think the MIR-24 is worth double the price of the MIR-1?

I've been learning a lot from this site and thanks again for the help


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:50 am    Post subject: Re: Mir Lenses - what are the exact differences & advant Reply with quote
winmazing wrote:

MIR-24 - There's an M & H mount for M42 and Nikon, but they look completely different. Is there anything that's optically different. Does one have an advantage over the other?


They look different because they were built by different factories.
Optically they should be the same lens. However I am of the impression that there could be a little difference.

Quote:
MIR-1 - I found the original MIR-1 & MIR-1B(V). I've read the original is better - is that true? I've seen different variations of this lens, but is there a preferred version that performs the best?


I prefer the MIR-1 (aluminium), but it's mostly a matter of look.

Quote:
Do you think the MIR-24 is worth double the price of the MIR-1?


It depends under which perspective.
From the collectioner's perspective, no: the MIR-1 (aluminium) especially is a much nicer lens to have on display and show to friends.
From the photographer's perspective, yes: the sharpness is similar, but the MIR-24 is one stop faster, has much better bokeh, and has much much better coating.
-


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
winmazing wrote:
...

There are several versions of the MIR-1. Silver M39 version, silver M42 version, black M42 version and both M42 version can be marked "Grand Prix" or not. I heard, that the best are silver Grand Prix. But I don't know how does it compare to MIR-1 B/V. I had only black Grand Prix so I can't compare...

MIR-24: Optical diagram is the same for all versions. MIR-24 is faster and it has unique color rendering.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Orio, i've been reading a lot of archived posts from you and it's been a big help.

So optically, the old silver aluminum Mir-1 performs the same as the newer made Mir-1B(V)?

I'm leaning towards the Mir-24 - I can get it for $100 USD, but I can also get the Mir-1B for $50. I need more convincing before I decide to buy Confused


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I really like the color of these Mir lenses. Does the M-24 outperform the Mir-1 in the color category?


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
winmazing wrote:
Thanks Orio, i've been reading a lot of archived posts from you and it's been a big help.
So optically, the old silver aluminum Mir-1 performs the same as the newer made Mir-1B(V)?


They should be the same lens optically speaking. Any difference you might notice should depend on copy variation factor (which can be a heavy factor in soviet lenses).

winmazing wrote:
I'm leaning towards the Mir-24 - I can get it for $100 USD, but I can also get the Mir-1B for $50. I need more convincing before I decide to buy Confused


If you take the lens for photographic purpose and not because you like the look of old lenses, go for the MIR-24, it's more expensive but a more enjoyable lens to use. The only advantages of the MIR-1 over the MIR-24 are the size (the MIR-1 is really small and can fit inside a small pocket) and the fact that it's a preset lens - of course for those who prefer preset lenses - for those who hate them it's a disadvantage.

winmazing wrote:
I really like the color of these Mir lenses. Does the M-24 outperform the Mir-1 in the color category?


Yes, definitely. The higher colour density is due to the better coating which I mentioned in my previous message.
-


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
i'm learning every post Smile

preset means you have to set the aperture before you mount the lens?


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
winmazing wrote:
i'm learning every post Smile

preset means you have to set the aperture before you mount the lens?


No, you can of course change the aperture while the lens is mounted.

What you do is you pre-set the aperture to what you want to shoot with... say f5.6. Most presets will let you move between wide open and that number f5.6.

So, after you preset the aperture, go wide open, focus, then stop down to f5.6, meter, and shoot.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
winmazing wrote:
i'm learning every post Smile
preset means you have to set the aperture before you mount the lens?


No, it means you have two aperture rings.
With one (called the preset ring), you can set, if you want, an aperture value in advance, for example f/8 (or f/22 or whatever value you like)
That ring will not operate the aperture directly, but it will limit the stopping down to f/8.
There is another ring (the aperture ring), of countinuous kind, that closes the iris.
The advantage of this system is that you can decide at which f/stop to take a picture without actually stopping down the iris. You can thus focus the lens wide open, then with a quick gesture close the iris down to the pre-selected aperture.
Of course, if you set the preset ring to wide open, that will be the same as not having a preset ring.

Preset lenses were the first tentative of lens automation. Of course they are not as fast in the use as a real auto lens, but some people actually prefer them.
The most common mistake that can be made using them, is to forget to meter the light stopped down. Focusing wide open easily makes someone meter the light that way also.
In fact, preset lenses were designed in a time when external light metering was the norm and not the exception.

Preset lenses for sure have an advantage, that the preset system is usually more solid and long lasting than the auto system. I have or have had a lot of preset lenses, and all of them were functioning perfectly.
On the contrary, I have had a lot of auto lenses, especially soviet MIRs and especially Carl Zeiss Jena wide angle lenses, with really crappy aperture build that get broken easily. I think I have made a world record recently: a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 2.8/180, and a gorgeous copy at that, that was stored by me in it's safe box when it was perfectly working, was revealed with aperture not working when i took it of the box. Nobody used it. It just broke by itself, only for being there a couple of months.
Go figure.
-


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
rawhead wrote:

What you do is you pre-set the aperture to what you want to shoot with... say f5.6. Most presets will let you move between wide open and that number f5.6.

So, after you preset the aperture, go wide open, focus, then stop down to f5.6, meter, and shoot.


Or the alternative way: preset the aperture - forget to stop down - and curse like *$£@l when the slides come back over-exposed. Shocked Evil or Very Mad


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
i feel like buying both now.. Confused i can see how lens collecting can be addicting... i have 28 Seiko watches so i know how it feels Surprised

are there any lenses that are comparable to these MIR lenses at the same focal length that can be found at more or less the same price?


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have Mir-1 silver grand Prix on sale in my Ebay shop if you need.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

The advantage of this system is that you can decide at which f/stop to take a picture without actually stopping down the iris. You can thus focus the lens wide open, then with a quick gesture close the iris down to the pre-selected aperture.
-


Yes, although an auto-aperture lens does that for you.

However, I was recently reading about focus shift, which is significant in some lenses. So an advantage of a preset lens is that one can focus wide open, then stop down, and check that the focus is still correct, before taking the picture. (Although, once can do that with the DOF preview button on some cameras, too).

The problems seems to be worst in wide angle lenses shot at a moderately large, but not wide open, aperture.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
winmazing wrote:
So optically, the old silver aluminum Mir-1 performs the same as the newer made Mir-1B(V)?


There may be a problem,. The silver M39 Mir 1 normally has a lens registration distance of 45.2 mm. This is shorter than the normal M42 distance of 45.5 mm. This means that it is not possible to focus to infinity when it is used on an M42 camera, or a camera using an M42 adapter. The registration distance is confirmed by the Zenit (KMZ) archive and the difficulties have been reported by a number of workers on this site and elswhere. However some workers report that they can achieve inifinity focus with a silver M39 Mir 1. These observations, together with other, indirect evidence, suggest the existence of an M39 45.5 mm Mir 1.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have seen M42 silver MIR-1. It wasn't M39 version with M39-M42 ring attached...

Anyway, with a bit slimmer adapter, each M39 SLR lens can reach infinity Smile


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:
Anyway, with a bit slimmer adapter, each M39 SLR lens can reach infinity Smile


Are these adapters readily available, and advertised as being suitable for M39 lenses, or do you have to modify what is described as an M42 adapter ?


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm talking about M42 adapters. I've a few Sigma -> M42 adapters from Alex, which are a bit slimmer and can be used with M39 SLR lenses (together with M39->M42 ring). I'm happy with them. But I'm not sure, if there are similar adapters for Canon or Pentax...


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@winmazing The title of your thread includes the phrase .. exact differences..

There are a few other details which you might wish to consider.

Close focus distance

Mir 1/Mir 1B(V) 0.7 m
Mir 24 M 0.3 m
Mir 24 N(H) 0.24 m

Minimum aperture Mir 1/Mir 1B(V)/Mir 24 M f/16 Mir 24N(H) f/22

Resolution Mir 1 45/23, Mir 24 M 40/21 lines/mm

I don't have the resolution figures for the Mir 1B(V) and the Mir 24 N(H) but my own feeling is that the Mir 1B(V) has the edge in terms of sharpness.

EDIT lines/mm was originally quoted as line pairs/mm. Thanks to wariag for the correction.

Last edited by sichko on Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:48 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sichko wrote:
@winmazing The title of your thread includes the phrase .. exact differences..

(...)
Resolution Mir 1 45/23, Mir 24 M 40/21 line pairs/mm

I don't have the resolution figures for the Mir 1B(V) and the Mir 24 N(H) but my own feeling is that the Mir 1B(V) has the edge in terms of sharpness.


One note:
Results of resolution test of Soviet lenses are provided in lines/mm.
So it would be about 22/11 (Mir-1) and 20/10 lp/mm (Mir24M).
Quite reliable practical test of MIP-1B aka MIR-1W is provided on this page, sorry, Polish language only, but with obvious l/mm test table.

Mir is the tweaked copy of Flektogon, and it's my favourite "wider" lens (Mir-1W, three copies Smile ) - it's really good, I like especially it's - maybe not highest - but almost constant resolution within entire frame.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
wariag wrote:
... sorry, Polish language only, but with obvious l/mm test table.


It's obvious in the Russian as well !!! Many thanks. I'll correct the post.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
so it looks like the MIR-24H is more versatile than the M42 mount, but optically the same. I have an eos 450 so i'm guessing there won't be any differences adapting the Nikon or M42 version.

For those who own the MIR-24 and MIR-1 - which one would you choose? I've read some opinions and I'm about to make a purchase so i'd like to find out some final opinions. Thanks!


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
wariag wrote:

Results of resolution test of Soviet lenses are provided in lines/mm.

Yes.

wariag wrote:

So it would be about 22/11 (Mir-1) and 20/10 lp/mm (Mir24M).

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong.

Russian l/mm is equal to the Western (btw: from the world of TV-technics) lp/mm.
Why? Because a white (or black) line must be on the black (or white) background...
See also (in Russian, from the same source):
www.zenitcamera.com/qa/qa-resolution.html#n1

Last edited by Zoom on Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:32 pm; edited 3 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Welcome Zoom! Nice to see you here!


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
winmazing wrote:
For those who own the MIR-24 and MIR-1 - which one would you choose? I've read some opinions and I'm about to make a purchase so i'd like to find out some final opinions. Thanks!


I use these lenses on a Nikon camera. The Mir 24H offers automatic aperture which is a distinct advantage. In order to use the Mir 1/Mir 1B I have to use an adapter with an optical element. As far as I can see it has little or no effect on IQ. However it acts as a weak teleconverter (~ x1.1) so that I am operating with an effective FL of ~ 41 mm. These factors will not apply on your canon so you really need the advice of a Canon user.

However more generally..

1. Note that the focusing ring is very close to the mount in the Mir 1. You might prefer the 24H where focussing is in a more conventional position.
2. I have had several Mir 1s - all of them have required stripping and cleaning before the controls worked comfortably. Maybe I have been unlucky - my sole Mir 1B came to me in perfect condition.
3. Notwithstanding the arguments about lines and line-pairs I think that the Mir1 and Mir 1B(V) are sharper than the Mir 24.
4. The Mir 24H comes with a interchangeable mount. The lens was originally supplied with (i) a Kiev 19/Nikon and (ii) an M42 mount. If you are very lucky you might find a lens with both mounts. This would enable you to use the M42 mount with an M42-EOS adapter if you already have one.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zoom wrote:
wariag wrote:

Results of resolution test of Soviet lenses are provided in lines/mm.

Yes.

wariag wrote:

So it would be about 22/11 (Mir-1) and 20/10 lp/mm (Mir24M).

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong.

Russian l/mm is equal to the Western (btw: from the world of TV-technics) lp/mm.
Why? Because a white (or black) line must be on the black (or white) background...
See also (in Russian, from the same source):
www.zenitcamera.com/qa/qa-resolution.html#n1


Hi Zoom and welcome.

Thanks for the clarification. It does seem to make sense. A "resolution" of ~ 20 would seem to be low for what are two good lenses.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2