Light Lens Lab 50mm f/2 "Speed Panchro II" for Leica M

[Huss]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, catacore said:

Prompted by the last comments here, I went back to my LLL SPII pictures and had another look at those shot between f/8 and f/16, and I still maintain my opinion which was expressed in post #162: "tack sharp". I can't see any diminishing sharpness in the centre of those images. Yes, the contrast is not the best, but the sharpness is there, pretty uniform across the whole frame.

Nevertheless, this was done out of curiosity, since I'm done with the M system. Don't want/need to prove anything. And my LLL SPII is sold, anyway. Maybe just sample variation.....

L.E. I pretty much liked this lens a lot. My Voigt 50/1.5 II has not seen any usage after I bought the LLL SPII.

Did you keep the CV 50 1.5 II, or also sell that?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sequitur]

On 7/27/2023 at 4:09 PM, catacore said:

That means this is not the rendering you are after. IIRC you liked the pre-production unit's rendering....or, actually, do you find them quite different, in the end (v2 vs. pre-production)?

I'm very interested in the answer to this question, too.

[Snuff]

I want to show you an interesting test from which you can see how different the picture of cine optics is from the picture of still lenses. The character is very different: the tonal and color palettes are different, and these parameters even have a greater impact on the perception of the image than the notorious sharpness and detail.

The test shots show that Nikon and Sigma photo lenses produce a sharp, contrast, color-neutral image. In my opinion it is lifeless and unattractive. Cinema lenses, especially the Cooke Speed Panchro II, produce a more pleasing, solid, color-dense image that is not overly sharp. Speed Panchro draws a generalized image, more poetic, without drawing attention to unnecessary details.

 

Cooke Speed Panchro 50mm T2.2 Series II

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!

 

Nikon AI-S 50mm F1.4

 

Sigma DG HSM Art 50mm F1.4

 

Cooke Speed Panchro 50mm T2.2 Series II

 

Nikon AI-S 50mm F1.4

 

Sigma DG HSM Art 50mm F1.4

 

Link to the full test: Cooke, Zeiss, Lumatech, Nikon, Lomo and Sigma lenses compared. Filmed on Arri Alexa Mini.

https://www.filmkompaniet.com/news/comparing-a-sigma-art-lens-with-ultra-prime-and-cooke-panchro

[catacore]

18 hours ago, Huss said:

Did you keep the CV 50 1.5 II, or also sell that?

Yes, it is for sale, since I am done with the M system. 

[Snuff]

The author of this video criticizes the LLL SP2 for a strong blue flare that looks too modern and unnatural. In this I agree with him and I think that it would be better if the flare was warm in color.

Here is some info on a lens coating from a LLL blog: "Prototype: Single, Amber coating. Production: Blue Coating, or Green Multi-Coating. Closer to Original, improvement in render performance. There is a built-in multicoated UV filter, but the filter is removable".

I think it is possible that this MC UV filter makes most of blue flare. Could you remove it and make a comparison?

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!

[Anthony Miller]

On 7/28/2023 at 9:59 AM, catacore said:

Prompted by the last comments here, I went back to my LLL SPII pictures and had another look at those shot between f/8 and f/16, and I still maintain my opinion which was expressed in post #162: "tack sharp". I can't see any diminishing sharpness in the centre of those images. Yes, the contrast is not the best, but the sharpness is there, pretty uniform across the whole frame.

Nevertheless, this was done out of curiosity, since I'm done with the M system. Don't want/need to prove anything. And my LLL SPII is sold, anyway. Maybe just sample variation.....

L.E. I pretty much liked this lens a lot. My Voigt 50/1.5 II has not seen any usage after I bought the LLL SPII.

My images were sharp as well all the way to f16 but all had central flare, hood or no hood, sun or overcast and the sun at my back.

LLL did get back to me with "The central flare is caused by SPII’s lens construction and it is normal under certain lighting conditions." and did not address the smudge or residue in my example.

Lens has been returned for a refund. I am still thrilled however with both my 8-element and Elcan.

 

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 7/29/2023 at 2:29 AM, sequitur said:

I'm very interested in the answer to this question, too.

I sometimes forget which forum I’ve answered questions on. I discussed this over at Fred Miranda Forum: the prototype stopped down was like a vintage 50 Cron  but wide open had bokeh similar to the 50 Elcan. It was sharp wide open without any glow. The production version is completely different and is more interesting to me. I find it amusing that some of the same folks that wish there was a 50mm version of the 35 Lux v2 will dismiss the SP II for the exact same character wide open. Granted the issue of central flare at f/8 and smaller is an issue for some, but given the original SP II was most often shot at f/5.6 and wider, I don’t find this to be a deal breaker for me personally. I’m also going to try removing the built-in UV filter and see if that improves or eliminates the issue of loss of central contrast at f/8 and smaller. The built in UV is a strange concept to begin with since stacking filters is a no-no, and many of us need to use color filters, polarizers, neutral density filters, etc. Even if it makes no improvement to the lens performance, I’m removing mine. I’d much rather use a Zeiss T* or B+W protective filter anyway.

[hdmesa]

Received my SP II replacement this morning — swapped black with the black with brassing. So far after a few casual aperture series from f2 all the way to f/22 and looking at them on the rear LCD, I don’t see any contrast loss in the center until f/16, and then only when shooting toward the sun, and also only in a very small spot in the center. This spot is simply lighter and not noticeably blue in color like my previous copy. The previous copy at f/8 had a much larger central area affected. Indoors, I’m not seeing any noticeable loss of central contrast when stopping down. This is with the UV installed normally. I won’t test removing the UV until I have a chance to test the lens on an M body to make sure the rangefinder is calibrated (in case I need to exchange it). This copy is actually earlier in the serial number range than my previous copy (both were/are V2 with the serial numbers starting over). (Edit to add: the brassed version could be a separate set of serial numbers from the regular black and/or assembled at a different time).

I don’t have the previous copy to check it, but I wonder if everyone else with the issue should check their lenses in a dark room by shining and LED light through the opposite end of the lens (taking care not to blind yourself) to check for any smudges, smears, or fog, etc.

Edited July 31, 2023 by hdmesa

[Huss]

Yeah, I never understood why they added the semi-permanent filter.  It can be removed, but not exactly very easily as just removing a normal filter.  And you have to be careful doing so.

LLL ships the lens w a filter but no lens cap.  Weird.

[Huss]

Just now, hdmesa said:

.

I don’t have the previous copy to check it, but I wonder if everyone else with the issue should check their lenses in a dark room by shining and LED light through the opposite end of the lens (taking care not to blind yourself) to check for any smudges, smears, or fog, etc.

This is a possibility because these lenses are not assembled in a clean environment, judging by the photos LLL published showing their staff in street clothes, no masks, no hair coverings etc

[hdmesa]

1 minute ago, Huss said:

Yeah, I never understood why they added the semi-permanent filter.  It can be removed, but not exactly very easily as just removing a normal filter.  And you have to be careful doing so.

LLL ships the lens w a filter but no lens cap.  Weird.

Yeah, would have been nice to have had a metal slip-on cap like they provide for their other lenses. Would also have been nice to have a second hood like the prototype that was just a short metal ring that screwed onto the filter threads (similar to the Voightlander 75 1.9 hood). 

[hdmesa]

1 minute ago, Huss said:

This is a possibility because these lenses are not assembled in a clean environment, judging by the photos LLL published showing their staff in street clothes, no masks, no hair coverings etc

Fujifilm GF 110 lens was notorious for occasionally arriving new with hair, dust in debris in them for the first few years. They have the full-blown NASA-level assembly rooms, too. Also never seen another LLL lens with anything inside it when new. I think it has more to do with the actual person assembling the lens — do they clean/check, double clean/check, triple clean/check when assembling or don’t they. Whomever was assembling the GF 110 for the first year or two was not very thorough.

[Huss]

2 hours ago, hdmesa said:

.. Whomever was assembling the GF 110 for the first year or two was not very thorough.

Word on the street has it that Leica's QA dept poached him.

[Snuff]

On 7/31/2023 at 7:26 PM, Huss said:

I never understood why they added the semi-permanent filter.

It seems they installed the UV filter because the original Cooke 50mm f2 SP II also has it.

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!

 

[hdmesa]

1 hour ago, Snuff said:

It seems they installed the UV filter because the original Cooke 50mm f2 SP II also has it.

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!

 

Yup

[hdmesa]

So I was able to very easily remove the built in UV filter using a lens spanner wrench. But it was so loose, I think you could use two toothpicks, one on either side with the tips in the grooves and turn the ring to unscrew it. 

Removing the UV makes no difference to the blue haze flare issue at smaller f-stops. I also more carefully tested my replacement and discovered this central haze appears at a much wider f/stop than has been reported. To test, go outdoors to a shaded area with aim the center of the frame on a dark object (at a tree trunk for example). Turn up the exposure about a stop over normal so you can see detail in the dark area. The blue haze appears as early as f/4. At f/4-5.6, it is diffuse and harder to recognize, but if you move the camera left and right, you can see the lighter central area follow. It doesn’t become a blue “spot” until about f/11. 

So essentially this is an f/2-2.8 lens if you don’t want to have loss of central contrast. I suppose the effect from f/4-5.6 could be a “look” since in essence it lightens the image in the center 1/3 of the frame and can highlight a central subject. But from f/8-f/22, it is image-ruining IMO. I think this is directly tied to the particular version of the SP II they decided to emulate and/or the fact that they scaled up the image circle to cover full frame versus the original S35 coverage and did so without proper testing for internal flare issues caused by the scale/size changes.

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!

Edited August 1, 2023 by hdmesa

[Snuff]

I also noticed a purple spot appearing in the center of the frame on my Jupiter-3 50mm f1.5 with a relatively closed aperture. You can see an example in this short video.

 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Snuff

[YB Hudson III]

12 hours ago, Snuff said:

It seems they installed the UV filter because the original Cooke 50mm f2 SP II also has it.

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!

 

Wrong, it does have 46mm filter threads that can be seen in the pic. The visible front element is convex.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hdmesa]

5 hours ago, YB Hudson III said:

Wrong, it does have 46mm filter threads that can be seen in the pic. The visible front element is convex.

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!

There are many different versions of the original. The one I put a red box around clearly has another flat piece of glass over the lens at the very end of the barrel.

[YB Hudson III]

1 hour ago, hdmesa said:

There are many different versions of the original. The one I put a red box around clearly has another flat piece of glass over the lens at the very end of the barrel.

The one you indicated in your post is a CSP Ser III 25mm, I assure you that front piece of glass is a convex front element.