Light Lens Lab 28mm f2.8 9 Element Lens Review

[rclompus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just published a review of LLL's newly released 28mm lens.  It's not an exact copy of the 1965 original but includes their own design improvements with new glass.  Interesting lens that is a mix of old and new.  Enjoy.

https://petapixel.com/2024/11/15/light-lens-lab-28-2-8-9-element-lens-review-impressive-and-character-rich/

 

 

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[JoshuaR]

Thanks for posting—this is a very nice review!

I've been curious about this lens. I've been looking for a 28mm with a vintage rendering that might work alongside my 35 Steel Rim and 50 f/1.2 Noctilux reissues. In the past I tried the 28mm Summaron reissue. It wasn't really a match. I simply don't know enough about lens design to understand why, but the flavor of vintage-ness I got from the Summaron was different.

My sense, just looking at these images, is that this lens is like a Summaron that goes to f/2.8. Is that your sense, or am I off-base?

I see that LLL is planning to develop Speed-Panchro lenses at various focal lengths, now 75mm and later 28mm.... I wonder if that's closer to what I'm looking for.

In any event, this looks like a beautiful lens!

[aficionados]

It's ugliest lens in terms of aesthetic on earth I have ever seen.

I wouldn't even use it even if it were given to me for free.

[rclompus]

Responding to Joshua Rothman, I have the 2016 28mm Leica Summaron lens. The LLL 28/2.8 9 Element lens reviewed was definitely sharper than my Summaron.  The image sharpness rolls off gently in the mid-periphery to the periphery when used at f2.8.  Stopping down to f5.6 and f8, images get sharper to the edges.   Newer aspheric lenses will likely show clear images to the edge of the frame with wider apertures.  The LLL lens really surprised me with its imaging characteristics. 

This image was taken at f2.8 with an M10.  

    

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!

[Vanillasludge]

The remanufacturing of old lens designs is an interesting phenomenon.   (Mind you, I’m not against it, just observing)

Society has certainly taken a pessimistic turn.  Until the mid 2000’s I think we generally craved things that were newer and objectively better.  

At some point that went out the window and now we look back more than we look forward.  
 

This seems to apply to a wide range of products including cars, vinyl records and stereo equipment.  
 

 

[pippy]

4 hours ago, aficionados said:

It's ugliest lens in terms of aesthetic on earth I have ever seen.

I wouldn't even use it even if it were given to me for free.

Blame Leitz. This is the original 28mm f2.8 '9-Element' which is what LLL have chosen to replicate accurately as far as the physical / aesthetic side of things is concerned;

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!

 

3 hours ago, rclompus said:

Responding to Joshua Rothman, I have the 2016 28mm Leica Summaron lens. The LLL 28/2.8 9 Element lens reviewed was definitely sharper than my Summaron.  The image sharpness rolls off gently in the mid-periphery to the periphery when used at f2.8.  Stopping down to f5.6 and f8, images get sharper to the edges.   Newer aspheric lenses will likely show clear images to the edge of the frame with wider apertures.  The LLL lens really surprised me with its imaging characteristics...

Thank you, Richard, for the review; I genuinely enjoyed it.

Reading through both the original post and also the comments noted above sort-of raises the questions of what is the target audience and purpose for this lens.

Please do correct me if I have misunderstood anything - I am interested to know - but is the following interpretation heading in the right direction?

It has, as you mention in the review, perfectly captured the 'old school' aesthetic of the original '9-E' but the optics have been redesigned to correct many of the aberrations inherent in the design of the 1965 - '72 Leitz lens. At the same time LLL have chosen not to go down the full ASPH route so certain aberrations have been retained which will allow the lens to exhibit some 'vintage' rendering at the widest apertures yet the lens will perform in a far more modern way once stopped-down to, say, f5.6.

The original '9-E' optical design - being non-retrofocus - is such that TTL metering is impossible. Does the LLL employ a retrofocus design which means that TTL metering is both possible and accurate? The rear-projection still seems to be very deep and the lens schematic still looks like a non-retrofocus design but it's hard to know whether the rear-most element is set deep enough in the body-throat to cause problems.

The LLL '9-E' is certainly a fascinating offering. On the plus side it can provide an amount of 'vintage' look wide open yet sharpen-up very nicely when stopped-down. It also captures some of the spirit of the (low production and nowadays-expensive) original. On the down side? It has neither the full-blown optical flaws characteristics of the Leitz nor the crispness offered by more modern 28 f2.8 ASPH lenses. When fitted with the lens-hood the '9-E' - both the original and the LLL release - is also, for a 28 f2.8, a HUGE lens which comes with an equally HUGE intrusion as far as v/finder blockage is concerned.

So I'm confused as to why LLL have chosen this v1 28 f2.8 for their re-issue unless it was partly for the mystique of the original and partly simply because they thought it would be a fun project. Their lens isn't 'Vintage' in rendering yet nor is it 'Modern'. In use it is far too large and will cause far too much finder-blockage when compared to, say, the tiny 28 f2.8 Elmarit ASPH. It might have a certain 'Retro-Charm' and borrow some of the unusual / rare Caché from the original but, as far as I understand it, the lens is neither one thing nor another.

Back in 1965 I can see why the lens might have been a good option; it having a two-stop advantage over the earlier offerings. But nowadays? Curiosity aside why would the LLL '9-E' be a sensible choice as a 'User' as opposed to almost any other 28mm f2.8 available today?

Philip.

[hjddd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They are producing 35 2 APO（replica of 11699） now， Leica has to do something to put them in jail

[markc2]

5 hours ago, Vanillasludge said:

The remanufacturing of old lens designs is an interesting phenomenon.   (Mind you, I’m not against it, just observing)

Society has certainly taken a pessimistic turn.  Until the mid 2000’s I think we generally craved things that were newer and objectively better.  

At some point that went out the window and now we look back more than we look forward.  
 

This seems to apply to a wide range of products including cars, vinyl records and stereo equipment.  
 

 

the fun thing with records, is that vinyl on a good system on average will smoke CD's. You have to spend a lot on a CD player before you catch up to vinyl. Sometimes I think we move too fast as far as tech and maybe this is a slight correction, and don't even get me started on reel to reel with a master tape. Best sound I've ever heard. I drive an EV and you would have to drag me back to the land of petrol. 

[pippy]

7 hours ago, hjddd said:

They are producing 35 2 APO（replica of 11699） now...

Interesting.

Can you post a link which mentions this? I've had a search around the www and also viewed all items shown on the nine pages of their 'Development Blog' page from the LLL website but all items are either the well-known copyright-expired items or else work-in-progress things which are equally out-of-copyright.

Thanks in advance!

P.

Edited November 18, 2024 by pippy

[hjddd]

4 minutes ago, pippy said:

有趣的。

你能发布一个提到这一点的链接吗？我在网络上搜索过，也查看了 LLL 网站上“开发博客”页面九页上显示的所有项目，但所有项目要么是众所周知的版权已过期的项目，要么是同样已过期的未完成项目。

提前致谢！

页。

Hi

they may do not put it in public website， you can send them email， they will tell you ， as I know the prototype has been produced for a while and they release sample images to local social media app on China mainland

[pippy]

24 minutes ago, hjddd said:

Hi

they may do not put it in public website， you can send them email， they will tell you ， as I know the prototype has been produced for a while and they release sample images to local social media app on China mainland

Ah! OK; well I suppose we will just have to wait and see whether it ever gets released.

So far they have been careful to only recreate out-of-copyright designs so were they to release an in-copyright lens things could get interesting on the legal side of things.

Philip.

[mdg1371]

My understanding is that the upcoming 35mm APO is an original design, not another in the line of reproduction of existing formulas. Externally, it looks a lot like the Leica 35mm APO though.

[streetrattakesphotos]

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!

I somehow managed to break my LLL 28mm 9e already, but not in a severe way. The front barrel is apparently glued in place, and rotates freely if the glue becomes undone. Should I blame Leitz for the rather lousy ergonomics that led to that happening (especially in the handling of the hood) or LLL for using glue on the front barrel? (I kid, I kid)

Regardless of my clumsiness, I like the photos that it takes. When a shot lands well with this lens, it *really* lands well. The way it renders complements the v1 summicron and 50mm f/1.2 replicas quite nicely. Too bad my composition skills aren't quite always all there. The camera should have been pointed way up, then the 2:1 crop wouldn't have been needed. Can't complain too much about your gear when you're not quite there yet as a photographer. 

Edited November 19, 2024 by streetrattakesphotos

[streetrattakesphotos]

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!

Another photo in Central Park. Lightroom's AI was used to remove those ugly anti-pigeon spikes on the statue, and the blacks were pushed 1 stop.

[Greenhilltony]

22 hours ago, pippy said:

Ah! OK; well I suppose we will just have to wait and see whether it ever gets released.

So far they have been careful to only recreate out-of-copyright designs so were they to release an in-copyright lens things could get interesting on the legal side of things.

Philip.

I saw they posted updates about the 35AA on Xiaohongshu (“little red book"), a Chinese social media platform. They’re doing their best to avoid copyright issues on the exterior design. I don’t remember if their AA has original optical designs, may check it later.

[pippy]

1 hour ago, Greenhilltony said:

I saw they posted updates about the 35AA on Xiaohongshu (“little red book"), a Chinese social media platform. They’re doing their best to avoid copyright issues on the exterior design. I don’t remember if their AA has original optical designs, may check it later.

They have also posted some updates on their own website but it would appear that nothing is happening very quicky. The latest (AFAICT) is from July 2023;

https://lightlenslab.com/blogs/upcoming-project/light-lens-lab-35mm-f-1-2-11873-update-i

As mentioned in the article they are currently testing two prototypes. It seems that there is ongoing development work happening behind the scenes. As far as their earlier attempts were concerned they write;

"Initial sample photos. However we have deemed these result as unsatisfactory due to assembly and tolerance. We are currently undergoing further testing in order to improve its rendering performance."

The 35mm f1.4 AA, of course, is a very different kettle of fish in comparison to the 35 f2.0 APO which is the lens mentioned by hjddd in post #7.

Philip.

Edited November 19, 2024 by pippy

[Greenhilltony]

On 11/19/2024 at 7:16 PM, pippy said:

They have also posted some updates on their own website but it would appear that nothing is happening very quicky. The latest (AFAICT) is from July 2023;

https://lightlenslab.com/blogs/upcoming-project/light-lens-lab-35mm-f-1-2-11873-update-i

As mentioned in the article they are currently testing two prototypes. It seems that there is ongoing development work happening behind the scenes. As far as their earlier attempts were concerned they write;

"Initial sample photos. However we have deemed these result as unsatisfactory due to assembly and tolerance. We are currently undergoing further testing in order to improve its rendering performance."

The 35mm f1.4 AA, of course, is a very different kettle of fish in comparison to the 35 f2.0 APO which is the lens mentioned by hjddd in post #7.

Philip.

Sorry for the confusion, when I wrote 35AA, I meant the APO-ASPH 35/2. They specifically posted a comparison of the chromatic correction performance in highlight between their apo and Leica’s, and both of them showed none of purple/green fringing…I think that’s quite impressive.

[adan]

Just for the record, it is very, very hard to defend a lens-design patent.

All it takes to make a very similar "new" design, that does not violate patents, is a tiny specification change in a glass type or types(which may still have effectively the same refractive index or Abbe number) 

https://www.schott.com/en-gb/products/optical-glass-p1000267/technical-details

....with a corresponding tweak to thicknesses/spacings, curvatures, or number of elements, if needed. And perhaps moving the position of the aperture.

What protected Leica M lenses for ~50 years (1949-1999) was the specific bayonet lens-mount patent. Revived in part when 6-bit coding was added to the mount specification (2006).

Voigtlander, LLL, 7A, TTA, etc. can now make M bayonet lens mounts, but cannot make M lens mounts with coding factory-installed. And they are free to make a close replica of a 35mm APO-Summicron - so long as it is not an exact optical copy of everything specified in the lens patent (cosmetics are not patentable either, except as to trade-marks like the actual words "Tessar," "Summicron" and "Leica/Leitz."

Take a look at how many "Tessar-type" lenses were released - before the Zeiss patent expired in 1922.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tessar

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Alberti]

A question on the filters for use with the Lens Hood 12501 on the 28mm 9E.

It looks like there is very very little space left, even the smallest filter might not fit in between the 12501. Inside, the hood gets smaller in front of the lens: 52.5mm where it fits around the lens vs 51.1 mm (this is a recess that ensures the hood fits nicely against the lens) --> so the filter must also have an outside that is 1.4mm smaller.

Without the hood at least, yes, a 49mm can be used. But with the hood?  Note that the original Leitz 12501 hood (21mm, 28mm) used Series 7 filters - these are as far as I understand, filters that drop in, do not have a screw mount 49mm.

- 'Sometimes' other filters stay flush with the outside of the front filter screw of the lens. 'Sometimes' they have a mm or so smaller diameter. Just enough?

I have found interesting
1) K&F MCUV Lens Filter, Nano Xcel Series (I use it on my 28/Summaron-M)
2) B + W Uv Filter Xs Pro MRC Nano (I use this on my 24/Elmar) - I'm sure that one stays flush.
Both seem to be flush on their lenses - - -

And the front-element of the lens is very close to the outside.  So I'm afraid that very slim/low profile and recessed filters might touch the lens.

What do you use?

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!

Or should Thorsten design a hood 🤣 ??

Edited December 17, 2024 by Alberti

[kiwidad]

On 11/17/2024 at 4:52 PM, Vanillasludge said:

The remanufacturing of old lens designs is an interesting phenomenon.   (Mind you, I’m not against it, just observing)

Society has certainly taken a pessimistic turn.  Until the mid 2000’s I think we generally craved things that were newer and objectively better.  

At some point that went out the window and now we look back more than we look forward.  
 

This seems to apply to a wide range of products including cars, vinyl records and stereo equipment.  
 

 

key word "objectively" better.

Is a car better because it's faster or more comfortable to ride in or perhaps quieter? the problems is to what standard? is a lens better if its sharper or is it the rendering? Is an old tube stereo specced the same as a new transistor one worse purely because it not newer? 

I find it interesting that with some of the older lenses now suffering from the effects of age (fungus, haze etc), companies are making what are essentially replicas of a sort with modern tech improvement ( I would guess coating probably inmost cases). 

Leica try to fill the shoes in both worlds and at a huge cost. 

I acquired a LLL 50mm f2 "cook" panchromatic lens earlier in the year and It does definitely have look in certain lighting situation.  Can't beat the flare but its not an everyday carry for me.