SLR Magic 50mm f0.95 M Lens

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, but the point is that it is not the mount that is overstressed ( although a mount in not-too-thick light metal cannot withstand an immense leverage) but the lens giving against the spring in the bayonet that is supposed to keep the lens in contact with the body mount ring.

[Phil U]

(I presume) the mounts are designed to cope with a certain load based on Leica's heaviest lens and a margin so if another lens exceeded the loading then mount failure (even if not catastrophic) could be expected.

 

Can a noctilux 0.95 be used on an M3?

[stunsworth]

Can a noctilux 0.95 be used on an M3?

 

Yes

[farnz]

Fair comment, Jaap. I was referring to the mount in the holistic sense as the interface between lens and body and therefore including both parts; I apologise if it muddied the matter.

 

Pete.

[pico]

On point of mechanics; once you attach lens, regardless of the weight of the lens, to a camera body & lens flange remain parallel so there should be no stress on the camera if overall combination is held/supported at centre of gravity. I can't see how this would be a problem and would love somebody to provide technically sound explanation.

 

The only way to know is to put a flex/stress instrument to measure in actual practice.

 

If you look at the RF roller, it is indeed close to two sprung parts of the mount, and while the mount is not supposed to distort, regardless, we simply do not really know yet. If stress is a contributing factor, then it is likely occurring when the camera is hanging by the strap lugs rather than being held to focus.

[jaapv]

Well, if you know the center of gravity of the lens and the weight/mass, and take the lower edge of the mount as the fulcrum, the force on the springs should be simple to calculate.

The springs can only exert a limited force as the lens must be able to mount smoothly, and the resultant difference will show whether the springs suffice to hold the lens tight.

[mmradman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I measured M body flange, it is 52/44mm in diameter, 4 mm width of the flange, area is 602.88 sqmm. That is lot of metal that is in contact, for comparison square inch is 645 sqmm.

 

One of the four bayonet lugs is in front of RF roller and any proper M lens is locked solid. Movements if any would be less than RF roller tolerances, unless Leica dropped their standards recently. Any lack of focus accuracy would be down to play in brass helicoid.

 

IMHO looseness between M body and M lens is non existent, other lesser lenses could be different matter.

 

With regard to Pico assertion on stressing lens mount when carrying camera with heavy lens attached over the shoulder I would say that gravity is your friend and any top heavy item attached to the lens will cause combination to point down where stress on the flange would be evenly distributed, shoulder would suffer the most, next strap lug mounts.

 

The fact that one lens is 900 g in weight and it causes focus errors is frankly red herring.

[brianv]

I'd expect that the failure mode would be distortion of the mounting rings from excessive loading (downward force) imparted by a lens. The distortion might not be visible to the naked eye and there only needs to be a 0.1 mm delta to cause a focussing problem (according to brianv in post 114). (I presume) the mounts are designed to cope with a certain load based on Leica's heaviest lens and a margin so if another lens exceeded the loading then mount failure (even if not catastrophic) could be expected.

 

Pete.

 

From #114: "Any movement of 0.01mm is going to knock RF alignment off. "

 

I've found that the 5cm F1.5 Sonnar conversions need to be better than 0.02mm for proper RF alignment and wide-open focus to agree reasonably. So for an F0.95 lens- I figure 0.01mm. I have worked on some old wartime LTM Sonnars with excessive wear in the mount that caused issues: wobble throwing the focus off. I ended up making a sleeve for the optics module to stop the wobble.

[farnz]

Thanks, Brian, I hadn't spotted my typo of 0.1 instead of 0.01 mm.

 

Pete.

[jaapv]

The problem is not when carrying the camera lens down, the problem is when holding the camera in shooting position. The question is whether the turning moment of the suspended mass is larger than the spring pressure holding the lens against the flange. The spring pressure cannot be too high, because that would make the lens difficult to mount. If it would allow a flex/play of more than 0.01 mm at the top of the mount it would affect focussing accuracy.Undoubtedly the mechanical parts can tolerate considerably higher forces to distort irrevocably,

In my example I quoted a 1750 gr lens, with the center of gravity an estimated 15 cm out would bend a comparable mount (R camera) when subjected to the strain of intensive use e.g. bouncing about in offroad vehicles and being carried when hiking. .Such forces would not apply to an 1 Kg lens with the center of gravity maybe 7 cm out.

I measured M body flange, it is 52/44mm in diameter, 4 mm width of the flange, area is 602.88 sqmm. That is lot of metal that is in contact, for comparison square inch is 645 sqmm.

 

One of the four bayonet lugs is in front of RF roller and any proper M lens is locked solid. Movements if any would be less than RF roller tolerances, unless Leica dropped their standards recently. Any lack of focus accuracy would be down to play in brass helicoid.

 

IMHO looseness between M body and M lens is non existent, other lesser lenses could be different matter.

 

With regard to Pico assertion on stressing lens mount when carrying camera with heavy lens attached over the shoulder I would say that gravity is your friend and any top heavy item attached to the lens will cause combination to point down where stress on the flange would be evenly distributed, shoulder would suffer the most, next strap lug mounts.

 

The fact that one lens is 900 g in weight and it causes focus errors is frankly red herring.

[buffazoid]

The SLR Magic Hyperprime 50 LM T0.95 Leica Mount Lens “Rolling Review” | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

 

Interesting update from Steve Huff:

 

"UPDATE: Lots of nonsense has been spread about this lens on the internet due to one person’s comments and one persons lens. I have never had ONE issues with this lens and I found it to be solid, well made, beautiful and to render even better than the $11k Leica Noctilux (for my tastes) all for less than half the cost. The claims that were made were uncalled for as Andrew from SLR Magic is one of the nicest guys I have met in recent years as well as one of the most helpful and generous. The SLR Magic Hyperprime is now shipping with full production versions of the lens in full production packaging. It comes with a great warranty and is a solid great performing lens. Again, my experience with it has been nothing but positive and in some cases amazing. I am not the type of guy who says “It’s only Leica for my M” as there is tons of GREAT glass out there besides Leica. Whatever works I always say and this lens just “works”.

 

Thanks again to Andrew for all he has done for everyone AND even releasing this lens which no one else had the balls to do."

[buffazoid]

Interesting comments from Judd Weiss:

 

"I used the Hyperprime lens to capture some of the shots Steve Huff included in his above rolling review. I was at the LA workshop, and I was just as impressed with the Hyperprime lens as everyone else.

 

I recently spoke with Stephen Patterson personally about his widely reported matter with the Hyperprime, and I WAS SHOCKED!! I’ve always respected Stephen as a talented photographer and an engaging writer, I couldn’t have believed that I would come to the conclusion that he is a cruel bully and a dishonest jerk. I rarely say such a thing about anyone, and certainly never could say that about Stephen, until I personally brought up with him questions about his claims against SLR Magic and Andrew Chan.

 

First there is the fact that he neglects to state that he had a severely discounted pre-release beta lens. That alone pretty much explains most of the issues he brought up, and it is ENTIRELY inappropriate and dishonest to publicly review the mechanical quality of a prototype when you neglect to state that. The issues he describes have not been experienced by others with final release lenses. Indeed many others who have early pre-release beta Hyperprimes have not encountered the issues that Stephen is reporting.

 

There is a difference between Stephen and the other volunteer program testers, Stephen had the 50mm Leica Noctilux on order for 18 months. It seems obvious that you can’t justify owning a $5000 lens when the similarly speced lens you dropped $10,000 on just arrived. That’s big money and it will influence anyone’s behavior. I don’t blame him for wanting to now get rid of the Hyperprime, I do blame him for his immature, unfair, and dishonest behavior in order get his money back outside of the terms he agreed to, and the followup from him in order to justify his behavior.

 

It must be clear taht Stephen was refunded 100% for his lens. So was Dave Grady, who said he needed the money other things. They weren’t charged a 20% refund fee. They weren’t charged 10%. They weren’t charged anything at all. In fact, as an act of goodwill, Andrew even paid Stephen for his $150 filter, to go over and above to take care of Stephen. Stephen was threatening Andrew with a serious and painful public bashing of SLR Magic if Andrew didn’t issue a full refund in cash at Stephen’s convenience when he was visiting Hong Kong. A full refund wasn’t agreed to in the terms for the discounted test program, but Stephen was so harsh with his threats that Andrew decided to let it go and just take care of Stephen and make him whole, right or wrong.

 

As many of us know, the heavy public bashing originating from Stephen and Dave went forward anyway, but shockingly dropped the context that they were were knowingly in a volunteer test program for a pre-release beta lens!!

 

I brought that up with Stephen, he ignored it, and became hostile with me. Wtf?? He’s unwilling to admit that he misrepresented the matter. I told him that it’s suspicious that he had a Noctilux finally arrive after an 18 month wait at the same time that he raised all these problems. Stephen’s actual response:

 

“Judd, you of all people should know the danger in making false accusations, as you are doing when you say that I simply wanted out of the Hyperprime because I had a Noctilux on order.”

“…to your point about my images with the Hyperprime I agree that they are unique, which is why I was always going to keep the lens in spite of receiving the Noctilux.”

 

Fair enough, I never accused him, but simply said it’s relevant and and worth considering in light of the hoopla he created. And I pointed out that there were numerous careless casual misstatements (such as personally knowing of a dozen other lens failures) that ended up getting picked up into wider circulation, but not before being further exaggerated. I told him that at the very least, it would be honorable of him to at least clear up the statements that he knows to be false. He refused. I didn’t think this necessarily dishonest at this point, just heartless considering the damage that he’s caused, and the arrogant tone to his blatant misstatements.

 

And then I remembered and rediscovered this post from June 14, 2012:

 

—————-

Stephen Patterson

My dealer in the US called saying my Noctilux was in, so I will be selling my Hyperprime. It’s a great lens, and for the money can’t be beat, but I prefer the size of the Nocti. Send me a message if interested.

—————-

 

It’s not just that Stephen Patterson had the nerve to lie to me, to everyone in that facebook discussion group, and everyone else on the internet. It’s also that Stephen had responded with intimidation when he originally lied to me about making false accusations. It’s also that Stephen came across so unrepentantly harsh towards someone who was eager to take care of him fairly. That Stephen arrogantly seemed to feel it perfectly fine to crash and burn a company because he experienced some inconvenience with a discounted pre-release beta test lens.That Stephen was able to capture some STUNNING shots with that lens, and yet was still made whole, never charged for his 2.5 months with an expensive used lens that he refers to as “a great lens, and for the money can’t be beat”. That Stephen refused to correct his damaging careless misstatements and mischaracterizations that got exaggerated in wider circulation.

 

For those reasons Stephen Patterson is a cruel bully and a dishonest jerk.

 

Some of us have begged him to be honest here and set the record straight. He doesn’t want to.

 

That’s such a shame. A simple fact remains, Stephen and Dave were not hurt by their experience with SLR Magic. The same cannot be said in reverse.

 

A paying customer is not god’s gift to the universe when he’s determined to make your life miserable and ruin your company. Certainly not a fully refunded customer who made good use of the product. Certainly not a customer who took part in a heavily discounted volunteer pre-release beta program.

 

Stephen has some explaining to do about answering the claims against him. Otherwise he should apologize for his behavior. Or let it stand that he’s a deceptive immature bully and a jerk with zero regard for the damage he causes.

 

The complaints of Stephen and Dave were not shared by many others in the volunteer test program. And yet Stephen and Dave were the source for virtually all of the complaints on various Leica and photography forums, and then circulated wider by Elizabeth Wang-Lee on her Leicaliker blog and her messages to DPReview.com

Stephen has long moved on from this issue, but the damage he caused SLR Magic didn’t stop, and was particularly painful at Photokina, especially with Elizabeth promoting the dispute.

Elizabeth has become silent on this and I guess that means she’s unwilling to correct her false statements to honestly clear up the matter. If she doesn’t, she will permanently damage her credibility and reputation for accuracy and honesty. I hope she will speak openly and publicly about this. Most of the damage to SLR Magic came from her, and she seemed so nice when I met her, I sincerely hopes she helps to rectify the matter.

 

For the record, I am not in any way affiliated with SLR Magic. I’ve only purchased 2 items from SLR Magic, and the only thing I’ve ever received for free was a screen protector for my NEX with a friendly note, which I though was a thoughtful gesture. I’ve never been promised or asked for anything for free or discounted from SLR Magic.

 

I remember how generous, trusting and helpful Andrew was with us all at the LA workshop. He let me borrow a very expensive prototype lens to try out and shoot a party following the workshop after just meeting me briefly. He let us all walk the streets with his very expensive gear out of his sight and reach. Elizabeth dropped one of his heavy Hyperprime lenses on CONCRETE and dented the lens barrel, and Andrew didn’t give her a hard time, let alone even complain. I shot with that same dented lens at a party that night (some photos in the review above) and it performed excellently, that thing is SOLID and clearly well built to handle the concrete crash Elizabeth gave it.

 

I COMPLETELY agree that Andrew, or someone from SLR Magic should have responded on the forums immediately, whether that’s a pain in the ass or not. If it’s a matter serious enough to potentially take the whole company down, it’s something that needs to be done. I do understand that a subtle language barrier is making it a bit difficult to do that as effectively as he’d like.

 

I am aware that devastating serious damage has been done to Andrew and SLR Magic. It’s hard to move forward and create exciting products to offer the world when you get the wind knocked out of you from public relation nightmares that may not be fair. I can personally relate to that, and I know how hard that is to stomach.

 

This is so wrong. These products are Andrew’s life. Andrew has been so kind to many of us. What would demonstrate honorable character here would be for those involved to finally do their best to openly and honestly rectify this matter.

 

I hope SLR Magic is able to move past this and continue to offer us more exciting options in the future."

[brianv]

I would be more impressed with users posting their positive experience with the production lenses after using them for a few months.

 

I would not buy one after reading the experiences of users with the pre-production lens.

 

SLRMagic is a paying sponsor of Steve Huff's site. To pass off all of the criticism of this lens onto one person oversimplifies the problems brought forward with this lens. Until the company submits a production lens to a reputable technician for a full inspection of mechanical and optical build, people would be crazy to buy it.

[myinoshi]

**UPDATE**

I have recently learned that due to the mechanical design of this lens, it is held together almost entirely with glue instead of screw. Not only did I not recommend it before, I suggest you look away from this company entirely.

 

The SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 M mount- RF Coupled (Will refer to it as HP) is an ultra fast 50mm T/0.95 (f/0.92) prime lens hand-assembled in China. This review focuses not on brick wall and chart test but rather my personal impression of the lens as a real customer and an enthusiast photographer. I not affiliated with SLR Magic, et al in any way.

Let’s get down to business. This is my story.

I’m just a normal guy like everyone else and I admit that my excitement for the SLR Magic HyperPrime LM came from Steve Huff’s very own review of the lens. When Steve Huff announced that SLR Magic opened up 10 pre-order slots, I barely missed it. I then emailed SLR Magic to put me on the waiting list for their next production. A month goes by and I get an unexpected email from SLR Magic that slots are opened to those with priority/ in line. Of course, I placed the order at the full amount of $4,288 before pre-orders opened up to the public. This was also before the price increase, which is now near $5,000. I was told the lens will be delivered late July/August at the time of purchase.

As a special request, I asked SLR Magic if I can have the front ring without engravings like SteveHuff’s black stealth version. I was told the stealth version is not for regular customers and only for reviewers and volunteers. I therefore opted in to an internet review. I agreed and here I am. They eventually sent me the lens… however, with engravings, just not painted white (unpainted?). Additionally, the word “Stealth” was engraved as well. These “stealth” lenses, as Andrew (SLR Magic’s Product Manager) personally told me, were considered “Exclusive Edition.” Aside from the front ring, I have been told there is no difference between Stealth copies and copies sold to non-reviewers.

 

Anticipation/Arrival/Unboxing

When I was emailed by Andrew that I’d be getting the SLR Magic HyperPrime very soon, I was ecstatic; I had waited just less than 2 month after placing my full order. But was it because I choose to review the lens the reason I got the lens quicker?

The Lens arrived in complete “neutral” packaging- a brown box bascially. First the lens was wrapped in a plastic bag which was then wrapped in about 2 feet of bubble wrap (and tape, and more tape, then more tape), which was then placed into a box just big enough for the lens itself. But the bubble wrap had bulged the package- like a package that was too big for its own box. This box was then placed into a larger box filled with multi-colored packaging peanuts, along with another box. And that’s it! Nothing else to it!

As a complimentary gift, SLR Magic included a free UV/IR filer (read below) and a wrist strap as a co-operation with the brand Barton 1972. I was then told the wrist strap was exhausted, so SLR Magic instead sent a neck strap at a free $20 surcharge. It looks like the same black braided one seen in SteveHuff’s “world exclusive first look” video.

 

Quality of Complimentary Accessories

I was initially told I’ll be receiving the following complementary filters along with the lens:

1) 1 pc ND 4

2) 1 pc ND 8

3) 1 pc UV IR

But on the day the lens was shipped, I received an email from SLR Magic, “…[our production manager was not happy with the effect of the two ND filters and rejected the whole lot. So, we cannot include the 2 ND filters to you with the lens.].”

The UV/IR filter I received is a very slim filter. Its material, admittedly, feels low quality. And the glass, itself feels cheap. If you hold the filter by the rim and gently shake it, the glass will wobble! If you also try to gently clean the filter while holding the black rim, the glass will move and rotate. Though it is does not wiggle or wobble while in-use, the glass is far from stationary in between the black rim.

The UV/IR filter produces noticeable and distracting flares under several indoor and outdoor conditions. This isn’t improved even with hood extended. Images will also look washed out or have an overly dramatic glow. When not intrusive, the UV/IR filter does result a minor loss of image quality but not significant if not comparing +/- filter.

At some point, one can assume this filter serves more as a protection to dust and debris rather than for practical use.

SLR Magic did say they’ll send me the ND filters at the end of July. I’ll see what happens then.

As for the neck strap, I have yet to use it, but the leather does feels high-quality. No other comment on this yet.

 

**UPDATE** I now shoot without a UV/IR filter. The glass has unmounted from the thin, black frame. You can simply hear the glass moving by holding the frame and rotating your wrist. That’s how bad it has become. The ND filter has arrived. I’m glad I waited for those. They do not suffer from the poor quality of the IV/IR filter.

 

Build/Impression

Unboxing the lens was, dissatisfying. It felt like opening a package my cousin from Singapore sent me last month rather than opening a package to a brand new $4,288 lens. At first touch, the lens felt cold. The metal they used is hard and thick (That’s what she said)! When I held it, I chuckled a bit to myself (That’s what she said)! This lens is incredibly dense and heavy! I expected heavy but not this heavy. On the M9 (or M8), the overall dimension is hardly much bigger than a small DSLR. It feels good, actually. Viewfinder blockage? It blocks a good amount but not enough for me annoyed by it. I’ve learned to see past the lens when composing. But the blockage may annoy others.

Aperture Ring

I then turned the aperture ring. It is clickless, but STIFF! It’s not like the one SteveHuff has as in his world premiere video. This aperture ring is THE MOST stiffest ring I’ve ever turned. It didn’t take a lot of effort, but enough to be annoyed going from f/0.95 to f/1.4 (the longest turn distance from one stop to another). Sometimes I use two hands to change the aperture. As you probably already know, the aperture stops are not evenly spaced. With each stop, the engraving distance gets shorter and shorter. f/11 is not engraved since it does not fit. The engravings are basically on a logarithmic scale.

Focusing Ring

The focus throw is another story. Unfortunately the focus throw rotation is not consistent throughout Within one full throw (a full turn from 0-infinite) I could feel it stiffening and loosen up at certain distances throughout. I found this irritating when trying to focus as quickly as possible with moving subjects.

** UPDATE: After using it for a few more days and revisiting this issue, the stiffness has loosened up. But I worry this may be due to a mechanical design loosening up instead?**

The feel of turning the focus ring is not smooth- It feels un-lubricated/causing friction. To best describe it, it feels like superfine sandpaper rubbing against each other making noise, YES, I did say noise, it’s loud- especially for a CINE lens.

There are 3 holes drilled straight into the focusing ring. One hole has a large silver screw but with normal use, you’ll hardly ever see it since it’s faces your feet when using the lens. The other two holes are similar size and sits right in your eye sight with tiny screws deep inside. Sadly these holes look like they were made by a cheap drill because you can still see tiny remains that did not fully come off- a bit like the small, extra plastic tab that didn’t fully come off your child’s plastic-army-men toys. Get the image?

Oozing out one of these screw hole, a hard, red residue can be found. I tried to wipe it away but it is a tough material and feels glued down. I emailed Andrew which he tells me it is “…[to prevent the screws from getting loose]…” I assume it’s some sort of Loctite glue? I managed to take some of it off.

Paint Chips/Scratches/Dust and dings

The lens is without minor imperfection which I will point out. You know when you drop a lens you’ll get tiny dings? Well upon unboxing the lens, I saw several of these dings and paint chips around the focus ring, aperture ring and even on other parts that a dropped lens couldn’t even produce. What I mean is that the individual parts that make up the lens looks to have been dinged and scratched prior to lens assemble because no way could a lens be chipped in any other way.

[myinoshi]

Aperture blades/Lens Barrel scratches

While looking down the heavy lens under direct sunlight with aperture at f/16, I noticed MANY scratches all over the aperture blades, both large and small. Could they come from improper handling prior to assemble? Could it be the blade themselves are scratching each other inside the lens? Either way, a new lens should not be like this at all.

I should also note that towards f/5.6, the aperture begins to form a disfigured square/circle/opening. Andrew tells me that it is “normal” for lenses to have perfect aperture wide open and a disfigured aperture stopped down and vice versa. I’d like to disagree since all the lens I’ve ever owed has never displayed this “normal.” All my lenses have near perfect apertures throughout.

In addition, while looking down the inside barrel of the lens I noticed thick scratches on the inside side wall of the barrel. I cannot make out how these could have been made. I began to worry, this could be a “used” lens labeled as “new”. Andrew states that they do no sell used lenses.

Dust particles can also be found on the inside of the lens- several of them- both small, tiny and oddly shaped ones too. I can’t say if they are dust (well, maybe some of them); Their shapes are just too odd. Obviously one won’t be able to see them at an f/0.95 picture, but still, this is unacceptable for such a high-priced lens.

The SLR Magic HyperPrime is a hand crafted lens. I may be experiencing all these issue possibly due to less-than clean assembly environment and poor quality inspection (or do they even care?) when building each one of these lens. And what’s more striking is that Andrew tells us only so many SLR Magic HyperPrime can be produced a month, yet I, as a customer, ended up with a lens that is, unfortunately, meagerly constructed and quality checked. I find SLR Magic’s construction of this lens inadequate. There is poor handling of individual parts and the overall quality control is highly questionable.

Hood Design

The slide out hood is wonderful in the sense that it is built right into the lens. It has helped in several situations. Mechanical design wise? Two thumbs down. Unlike like SteveHuff’s copy in his World premiere video, the slide out hood is very hard to pull out and very hard to side back down since it is very stiff. Not only that, there is no locking mechanism while extended. It seems like SLR Magic relies on stiffness to hold the hood in place. But what happens in 6 months from now when it becomes loose? How will my hood remain in place when walking around with my camera? Am I going to suffer a slippery, sliding hood easily going in and out of extension? A better design would suffice in the long run (assuming it can last 6+ months).

Dirty M- Mount

Before I mount any lens to my camera body, I make sure to clean the lens’s mount. Sadly, the SLR Magic HyperPrime had a dirty mount right out of the box (or bubble wrap). Not only that, a dark sticky substance could be found on the mount. I immediately wiped it off with a q-tip. I expected a more refined lens even in terms of initial presentation.

 

Optical Performance and Real Use

If you don’t use the included UV/IF filter you’ll find that this lens is surprisingly very sharp at T/0.95 (f/0.92) at ALMOST ALL distance. The reason I say “ALMOST ALL” is because at aperture 0.95 and the minimum distance of 0.7 meters, your main focus point will be subjected to a hazy, nasty, bright glow with nothing in focus. Basically this combination is useless unless you desire blurry, out of focus pictures.

Images quickly sharpen up as you stop down the lens.

Bokeh/Distortion

I personally find the Bokeh to be very smooth with onion ring circles. However, it is not as creamy as the 50mm Summilux-ASPH, whose bokeh is so perfect that there’s almost no character to it.

The SLR Magic HyperPrime’s bokeh also has a hint of nervousness to it and a subtle ghosting effect. I find it quite attractive and adds character.

Swirly bokeh can be seen towards the outer frame of my pictures. Some people like it, some people don’t. I fall into the latter category, but the Noctilux f/0.95 display this effect just as well.

Distortion is noticeable is you are shooting straight lines up close. Give it about 10 feet? On the M8, you’ll barely start to see this distortion near the edges. If you aren’t shooting lines, you’ll more or less be unable to see it.

Rendering/3D Pop

Because the DOF is so thin, you are either in or out of focus. No question about that. But depending on how accurate you are with focusing, SLR Magic HyperPrime can give you a very modern look (think Noctilux-f/0.95) when you nail a shot, spot on… or a classic dreamy look (think Noctilux-f/1.0) if you’re just barely there. Either way, the rendering is very hybrid like of these two Noctilux. The best of both worlds you can say?

Some people think that this lens produces a flat look. I will disagree. There is quite a 3D look to the way it separate the subject from its surrounding. The look is almost too good to be true.

Purple Fringing

It’s easily there. You can’t avoid it. And I’m not surprised. But what was surprising was that this lens exhibited purple fringing slightly more than my 50Lux but less than my 35FLE. This is amazing for such a fast lens.

T/0.95 is not perfect

In some situation, the largest aperture will make your focus point glow. I haven’t been able to narrow down when exactly this happens but it seems to be random. Even if you nail the shot, you have a glowing soft image at 0.95.I found this to be very annoying.

Focus Shift

I noticed none. Simple as that. I tested this on a tripod while stopping down the lens. My focus point remained spot on at all my apertures.

Some more words

Putting all negative things I’ve said above aside, the images come out quite astonishing! There is a 3D pop to the images I’ve taken. Bokeh is beautiful, but has varying characteristics. You must make sure your rangefinder is accurately calibrated because f/0.92 is very thin; You are either going to be in focus or out of focus. The size of it on a Leica (M8/M9) is large compared to my other lens, but it quickly becomes something I don’t think about. I’m just going to shoot and not worry about gear.

Last words/Will I recommend it?

Andrew told me that their optical formula is finalized. However, their mechanical design is constantly undergoing revision. Steve had a different internal design than my copy. And I’m sure that by the time you get yours (I hope you don’t) your copy would undergone a new mechanical revision as well. Will it be better? I’m not sure.

Honestly, this lens delivers! But I feel that this lens won’t hold itself together for very long. I’ll give it 1 year before I start to see something come apart, decoupled, loose or break. Hold off on this lens. Or better, forget it all together, DON’T BUY IT… and spend your money on a 50LUX. You’ll be glad you did.

[myinoshi]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Stealth3kpl]

No longer to be produced. If you've got one you're about to be rich!

Pete

[azzo]

Ouch!!!

[andybarton]

I received an email from Andrew to this effect this morning.

 

I don't think any further discussion is necessary, to be honest.