New Light Lens Lab 35 1.4 Summilux AA!

[Huss]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just got this email from LLL

https://g7j9aapxfhtlh9uu-65146650858.shopifypreview.com/blogs/upcoming-project/light-lens-lab-35mm-f-1-2-11873-update-i?syclid=ciu1bjqusvihpm7itsu0&utm_campaign=emailmarketing_146750013674&utm_medium=email&utm_source=shopify_email

Or you can get this version on ebay for $895,000...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/284152183021?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=101&itemid=284152183021&targetid=1520582376617&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9031025&poi=&campaignid=19851828444&mkgroupid=145880009014&rlsatarget=pla-1520582376617&abcId=9307249&merchantid=113520494&gclid=Cj0KCQjw_O2lBhCFARIsAB0E8B8uCKQSuCUtni2eIc-zxfP0pPzNwLJzW7nCnPcZazMyPBRphqFl38AaAi2xEALw_wcB

Cheapest regular one I could find is $20K

[Advertisement]

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

[adan]

Nice idea (depending on the ultimate price) - but we will have to see if it walks and talks like a duck, as well as looks like a duck.  

I had a chance to compare the Leica AA to the ASPH v.1 around 2003 (when the AA was "only" $6500 used).

Thumbnail: the AA was a bit sharper in the center and a bit softer in the corners than the ASPH at f/1.4. And a touch yellower in color rendering. Both holdovers from the Mandler Canadian philosophy (even though designed after Dr. Mandler's retirement). But not enough to be worth the extra shekels.

We'll see how the LLL version measures up.

[Bronco McBeast]

Ever heard of Chenali Blue perfume?

Well, same for this. 

[Bronco McBeast]

39 minutes ago, adan said:

Nice idea (depending on the ultimate price) - but we will have to see if it walks and talks like a duck, as well as looks like a duck.  

I had a chance to compare the Leica AA to the ASPH v.1 around 2003 (when the AA was "only" $6500 used).

Thumbnail: the AA was a bit sharper in the center and a bit softer in the corners than the ASPH at f/1.4. And a touch yellower in color rendering. Both holdovers from the Mandler Canadian philosophy (even though designed after Dr. Mandler's retirement). But not enough to be worth the extra shekels.

We'll see how the LLL version measures up.

For real, in a blind test even a nikon 28-80mm 3.3-5.6G with its TWO aspherical surfaces will equal any other lens on any given day, including Leicas. 
 

The big deal regarding the Leica AA is that it was a HUGE breakthrough for its time. And this can never be stolen or equaled. This LL Chinese COPY is 40 years late to the game, and means absolutely nothing: it’s just a lens. No breakthrough, no nothing.

Chenali Blue eau de toilette costs 3$ (for real), and it smells surprisingly good. Will you see me buying it? Or regret buying Chanel Blue for which I suddenly overpaid to the amount of 127$...?  

 

[Huss]

58 minutes ago, Bronco McBeast said:

For real, in a blind test even a nikon 28-80mm 3.3-5.6G with its TWO aspherical surfaces will equal any other lens on any given day, including Leicas. 
 

 

 

I recently bought that lens for $20.  It’s fantastic.  Optically - build quality is light weight plastic for for my purposes that is just fine.

[Winedemonium]

I haven't tried any of the LLL lenses. I was tempted by the 35mm 8-element repro, as a comparison article from a real lens connoisseur concluded it was a pretty good attempt. external website - Tahusa review. 

I think these LLL lenses bring some much dreamed about drawing styles into reach for people who can either never afford the originals, or who worry about damaging an original in normal shooting (i.e. not kid gloves). They don't replace - or attempt to replace - the originals, which are in each lens type they have chosen, phenomenally rare and expensive. The buyers of the originals are a small overlap with the buyers of these repro lenses. But even the former group have a try-before-you-buy option here, or perhaps a knock-about alternative to their safe-queens. 

[jaeger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, Huss said:

Or you can get this version on ebay for $895,000...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/284152183021?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=101&itemid=284152183021&targetid=1520582376617&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9031025&poi=&campaignid=19851828444&mkgroupid=145880009014&rlsatarget=pla-1520582376617&abcId=9307249&merchantid=113520494&gclid=Cj0KCQjw_O2lBhCFARIsAB0E8B8uCKQSuCUtni2eIc-zxfP0pPzNwLJzW7nCnPcZazMyPBRphqFl38AaAi2xEALw_wcB

 

I just bought one last week, I didn't know they actually have more than one...

[sometimesmaybe]

interesting admission by LLL

"Initial sample photos, however we have deemed these result as unsatisfactory due to assembly and tolerance, we are currently undergone further testing in order to improves its rendering performance"

[raizans]

You’d think Leica users would all be excited about the analog aesthetic, in which historically accurate reproductions are the clearest, most respectful and devoted expression of nostalgia.

Edited July 23, 2023 by raizans

[mdg1371]

13 hours ago, Winedemonium said:

I haven't tried any of the LLL lenses. I was tempted by the 35mm 8-element repro, as a comparison article from a real lens connoisseur concluded it was a pretty good attempt. external website - Tahusa review. 

I think these LLL lenses bring some much dreamed about drawing styles into reach for people who can either never afford the originals, or who worry about damaging an original in normal shooting (i.e. not kid gloves). They don't replace - or attempt to replace - the originals, which are in each lens type they have chosen, phenomenally rare and expensive. The buyers of the originals are a small overlap with the buyers of these repro lenses. But even the former group have a try-before-you-buy option here, or perhaps a knock-about alternative to their safe-queens. 

“ …knock-about alternatives…” This is exactly why (barring sub-standard performance) I will absolutely be buying this lens. I have an AA and love the rendering, but my field shooting is not particularly gentle— and with lenses like the AA, even normal bag wear devalues the lens significantly- no problem for occasional use but not good for daily drivers.
 

 Not only are they (hopefully) providing a direct alternative, but also the option of chrome on brass, which is a strong selling point for me. 

[69xchange]

Why do I have a feeling this lens is going to be over 2k?

[Bronco McBeast]

1 hour ago, mdg1371 said:

“ …knock-about alternatives…” This is exactly why (barring sub-standard performance) I will absolutely be buying this lens. I have an AA and love the rendering, but my field shooting is not particularly gentle— and with lenses like the AA, even normal bag wear devalues the lens significantly- no problem for occasional use but not good for daily drivers.
 

 Not only are they (hopefully) providing a direct alternative, but also the option of chrome on brass, which is a strong selling point for me. 

I am baffled, to say the least.

The only alternative to the real Summilux AA is the very lens that was created to replace it: the Summilux asph.

The Summilux (pre-fle) 35mm asph’ raison d’être is to replace the AA in the best possible way. It not only replaces it but surpasses it.

 

 

 

[Winedemonium]

4 minutes ago, Bronco McBeast said:

I am baffled, to say the least.

The only alternative to the real Summilux AA is the very lens that was created to replace it: the Summilux asph.

If Leica enthusiasts all agreed that there is an "only alternative" to anything, there would be substantially fewer millions of words published on this forum. The most passionate opinions are usually held (and debated) over the most infinitesimal nuances. 

As an owner of the 35FLE, I will put my hand up to say I have visited this Red Dot Forum comparison of the 35AA and 35FLE more times than I would care to admit, and frankly I prefer the 35AA rendering, especially in the first comparison. But if I bought a 35AA now, something like @mdg1371's dilemma would be on my mind. So, 35AA purchased or not, if LLL can really recreate the look, it is tempting.

[mdg1371]

4 hours ago, Bronco McBeast said:

I am baffled, to say the least.

The only alternative to the real Summilux AA is the very lens that was created to replace it: the Summilux asph.

The Summilux (pre-fle) 35mm asph’ raison d’être is to replace the AA in the best possible way. It not only replaces it but surpasses it.

 

 

 

I own a chrome ASPH pre-FLE, a fine lens to be sure. However, wide open, the AA is slightly sharper in my experience, on axis— in a small central area. Off axis, it’s the ASPH all day. Also, there is a subtle, but significant difference the bokeh renderings between the two lenses. 
“Alternative” may not be the truest word— lots of lenses can be alternatives— I often use ASPH pre-FLE and I love it to death. It absolutely is an alternative, but it is not a replacement.

If “surpasses” were the criteria, (assuming it means technically), none of us would be using vintage lenses if we could avoid it— 

Edited July 23, 2023 by mdg1371

[Bronco McBeast]

38 minutes ago, mdg1371 said:

I own a chrome ASPH pre-FLE, a fine lens to be sure. However, wide open, the AA is slightly sharper in my experience, on axis— in a small central area. Off axis, it’s the ASPH all day. Also, there is a subtle, but significant difference the bokeh renderings between the two lenses. 
“Alternative” may not be the truest word— lots of lenses can be alternatives— I often use ASPH pre-FLE and I love it to death. It absolutely is an alternative, but it is not a replacement.

If “surpasses” were the criteria, (assuming it means technically), none of us would be using vintage lenses if we could avoid it— 

It’s certainly not a different company that will decide which Leica lens supplements which, from its very own catalogue.

Leica, the company, has spoken clearly: it couldn’t produce the AA in a satisfactory way, therefore it (Leica) developed the “Asph.” version to supplement the “Aspherical” version. 
 

And later came the “FLE” version, to supplement the “ASPH.”. And now we’re onto the “FLE-2”...

All this being said, the “AA” version was meant to be a full plain jane production summilux. It only became “special” and a “Trophy” once it quickly got phased out and replaced by its close successor, the “ASPH.”. 
 

[rtai]

I had an AA once. It’s comparable to its ASPH successor but richer in color, sharper in the middle, and a bit more character (that part is subjective). It wasn’t expensive when I had it or when I sold it. The difference is subtle and if LLL can pull it off then I’ll absolutely buy one. 

[pippy]

On 7/22/2023 at 8:19 PM, Bronco McBeast said:

...in a blind test even a nikon 28-80mm 3.3-5.6G with its TWO aspherical surfaces will equal any other lens...

Using what criteria?

P.

[rramesh]

These days it's easier and relatively cheaper to make aspherical surfaces. Why, the Voigtlander 35mm f1.5 Nokton has not one but two double aspherical lens elements. Is it the same? No. Point being, it's the overall design of the lens that matters most.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Greenhilltony]

14 hours ago, Bronco McBeast said:

It’s certainly not a different company that will decide which Leica lens supplements which, from its very own catalogue.

Leica, the company, has spoken clearly: it couldn’t produce the AA in a satisfactory way, therefore it (Leica) developed the “Asph.” version to supplement the “Aspherical” version. 
 

And later came the “FLE” version, to supplement the “ASPH.”. And now we’re onto the “FLE-2”...

All this being said, the “AA” version was meant to be a full plain jane production summilux. It only became “special” and a “Trophy” once it quickly got phased out and replaced by its close successor, the “ASPH.”. 
 

It’s just a matter of taste. You cannot persuade the vintage taste persons into enjoying the successor or even the precursor. Because they value something other than the absolute image quality in terms of MTF or absolute sharpness. Some adore the 35 lux pre-asph for the holy grail, some dislike it. The same reason.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Greenhilltony

[69xchange]

15 hours ago, mdg1371 said:

I own a chrome ASPH pre-FLE, a fine lens to be sure. However, wide open, the AA is slightly sharper in my experience, on axis— in a small central area. Off axis, it’s the ASPH all day. Also, there is a subtle, but significant difference the bokeh renderings between the two lenses. 
“Alternative” may not be the truest word— lots of lenses can be alternatives— I often use ASPH pre-FLE and I love it to death. It absolutely is an alternative, but it is not a replacement.

If “surpasses” were the criteria, (assuming it means technically), none of us would be using vintage lenses if we could avoid it— 

does your version have a wobbly aperture ring?