LLL 35mm APO

[costa43]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It’s hard, if I dare say impossible to draw conclusions from a single image in a single moment from a single lens sample. I really do think that LLL make great lenses when it comes to the optical performance side of things. From what I have seen they are on par with the Leica lens they are paying homage to give or take. If there was a dealer in Europe so potential returns were less of a faff then I’d be tempted to pick up one or two to try out. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Alberti]

On 3/20/2025 at 5:00 PM, pippy said:

Could you post the corresponding photo taken with the Leica equivalent so we can see for ourselves how much better the Leica lens coped with this situation?

Thanks in advance.

Philip.

Sorry, I only got a 28mm Summaron among my 28s. So here is one in a similar situation (angle towards the sun but not as far. I never use the hood by the way.). 

A modern leica lens ought to behave good. 

 

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!

[Alberti]

On 3/21/2025 at 9:04 PM, Kwesi said:

WOW! that's pretty bad unless that is the look that is being advertised. Fortunately, I have just a few lenses - all Leica

and I'm pretty sure I did not have the UV/nano filter on at that moment. I know a fingerprint spread with a fine cloth over the the whole surface of the filter would get this great effect too. It looks like my favourite 28mm that has haze or some other things giving a cinematic effect inside with strongly lighted windows. 

Well, some cherish thr rffrct. At other times I remember getting a standard halo, but can't find the picture. 

[pippy]

To be perfectly fair to both Leica and LLL it would be absolutely essential that for the purposes of 'direct-comparison equivalent' lenses from both companies are used to take photographs of exactly the same subject matter from exactly the same place and at the same time (lens-changeover-time apart).

My only experience with a Light Lens Lab lens was with their 35mm f2.0 '8 Element' reverse-engineered creation which I bought almost entirely because of the report and images posted within this thread - and this thread DOES deal with flare and images shot of the same subject matter from the same place (etc...etc..);

 

I have yet to see any evidence which proves that LLL lenses are in any way inferior to their Leica equivalents where flare is concerned.

As always I will keep a very open mind whilst I await empirical evidence to clarify matters.

Philip.

[J S H]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

To be perfectly fair to both Leica and LLL it would be absolutely essential that for the purposes of 'direct-comparison equivalent' lenses from both companies are used to take photographs of exactly the same subject matter from exactly the same place and at the same time (lens-changeover-time apart).

My only experience with a Light Lens Lab lens was with their 35mm f2.0 '8 Element' reverse-engineered creation which I bought almost entirely because of the report and images posted within this thread - and this thread DOES deal with flare and images shot of the same subject matter from the same place (etc...etc..);

 

I have yet to see any evidence which proves that LLL lenses are in any way inferior to their Leica equivalents where flare is concerned.

As always I will keep a very open mind whilst I await empirical evidence to clarify matters.

Philip.

Agreed. This type of veiling flare is very hard to replicate when testing two lenses, even with the camera on a tripod. The sun moves faster than we think and the situation is continuously variable. I have quite a few M lenses, made by Leica and other companies. Most will show veiling flare issues under the worst conditions. It can always be eliminated with a well placed hand or card to flag the light. 

Edited March 24 by J S H
Typo

[Smudgerer]

14 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

LLL are NOT made to Leica's standards, far from it. They try to redo them as faithfyully as they can, but their "Made in China" part proudly engraved on the barrel really shows quirks and bypasses. You see that once you open them up, as I did with my 35mm. 

Interesting, thanks Al..........However for my useage the LLL lenses I have fit the bill quite nicely. I did say though in one previous post that given the choice, ( and the €€€ ), I'd probably go for a Leica made lens if I could justify it over a LLL "copy", as with my favoured FL 35mm, I stay with Leica.

[Alberti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 3/24/2025 at 3:19 AM, J S H said:

 Most will show veiling flare issues under the worst conditions. 

I should not comment here, being a 35mm APO thread.🥱

[Snuff]

On 3/17/2025 at 7:28 PM, costa43 said:

I think LLL and Thypoch for that matter are very interesting. They look to be built to a great standard but I wonder if anyone has opened them up and taken a look at the internal build quality. The stuff that is hidden. I'd be interested to know if it stacks up there.

I'm keen on the Thypoch 28mm f1.4.

On the issue of the quality of LLL lenses. I have heard more than once from owners of LLL SP2 50/2 lenses about the appearance of play in the helicoid after a short period of use.

In this video, one of these lenses was brought to a repairman to eliminate such play. The repairman disassembles the lens and swears at its design and assembly, which uses adhesive joints, but even they do not help to avoid the appearance of play, since the parts have large tolerances.

The use of glue during assembly complicates the disassembly of the lens and such an assembly obviously does not meet the standards of Leica or Zeiss. The video is in Russian, turn on subtitles.

LLL commented on this topic:

Quote

We have moved away from using glue during our production and assembly for newer lenses.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

On 3/18/2025 at 7:43 AM, costa43 said:

I think Leica more than anyone else will always hike the price of their gear up, they know full well that they have to control the used market as best as they can. If your existing user base is losing too much off the RRP too quickly, the number of people purchasing that product will reduce over time. People will hold onto their cameras for longer and for a company that relies heavily on its existing user base to upgrade, it would cause a headache I’m sure. Cheap 3rd party lenses sell more bodies, gets people into the system, the GAS kicks in slowly and they upgrade. How many of us started with a used m8 or m9 and a Voigtlander/Russian etc lens. These lenses are all free marketing for Leica. 

I think there is also the case that Leica has increasingly positioned itself as a luxury company in the last twenty years. It changed from a precision engineering company with a luxury bent into a luxury company with a precision engineering bent. The prices have increased much faster than inflation, and they have chosen to position particular products (the APO M Summicrons and Noctiluxes in particular) to levels which probably do not bear as realistic a relationship to their cost as some might like to believe. One clue of this comes from their old pro-forma invoices where the products are listed as having "statistical value". I am not sure if they still do this, but my old one lists the statistical value of the M9 as 880 euros, and the S2 as 4000 euros. M lenses are valued at 750 euros. I think these numbers probably give a better view of what these lenses actually cost Leica in an actuarial sense. The numbers are pretty interesting (though from 2011). I think this also demonstrates that it is not impossible for LLL to build a 35mm APO quality lens for a much lower price without skimping on quality. Certainly their labor is cheaper, but I think that is probably less important than market positioning.

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!

[TheBestSLIsALeicaflex]

On 3/24/2025 at 3:45 AM, Al Brown said:

LLL are NOT made to Leica's standards, far from it. They try to redo them as faithfyully as they can, but their "Made in China" part proudly engraved on the barrel really shows quirks and bypasses. You see that once you open them up, as I did with my 35mm. 

The only lenses that have ever broken on me in the field are Leica lenses.  Ironically two, different 60mm Elmarit R's -- the same focusing issue -- and a more modern aspherical M mount lens.  In fixing the aspherical lens, a well known repair tech here in the States (hint, one of the big three), complained that it was all plastic inside and modern Leica lenses are junk compared to what they used to be.  Now, this was almost twenty years ago, so maybe "Leica standards" have changed since then, but I've been favorably impressed with the several LLL lens I own.  

Edited April 7 by TheBestSLIsALeicaflex

[archive_all]

16 hours ago, TheBestSLIsALeicaflex said:

The only lenses that have ever broken on me in the field are Leica lenses.  Ironically two, different 60mm Elmarit R's -- the same focusing issue -- and a more modern aspherical M mount lens.  In fixing the aspherical lens, a well known repair tech here in the States (hint, one of the big three), complained that it was all plastic inside and modern Leica lenses are junk compared to what they used to be.  Now, this was almost twenty years ago, so maybe "Leica standards" have changed since then, but I've been favorably impressed with the several LLL lens I own.  

Curious which M lens you speak of. In some @yukosteel articles the more recent M lenses don't look all plastic inside. I'm not saying things aren't without issues but maybe he can comment on typical construction. I've been lucky with my M lenses and I don't yet have any LLL so can't speak of their construction. 

[TheBestSLIsALeicaflex]

4 hours ago, archive_all said:

Curious which M lens you speak of. In some @yukosteel articles the more recent M lenses don't look all plastic inside. I'm not saying things aren't without issues but maybe he can comment on typical construction. I've been lucky with my M lenses and I don't yet have any LLL so can't speak of their construction. 

It was a 35mm Summicron Asph from circa 2004ish.

[archive_all]

3 hours ago, TheBestSLIsALeicaflex said:

It was a 35mm Summicron Asph from circa 2004ish.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that. I had a 35 Summicron v4 for a long time and it's well known that early copies used plastic. 

[costa43]

On 3/26/2025 at 6:10 PM, Stuart Richardson said:

I think there is also the case that Leica has increasingly positioned itself as a luxury company in the last twenty years. It changed from a precision engineering company with a luxury bent into a luxury company with a precision engineering bent. The prices have increased much faster than inflation, and they have chosen to position particular products (the APO M Summicrons and Noctiluxes in particular) to levels which probably do not bear as realistic a relationship to their cost as some might like to believe. One clue of this comes from their old pro-forma invoices where the products are listed as having "statistical value". I am not sure if they still do this, but my old one lists the statistical value of the M9 as 880 euros, and the S2 as 4000 euros. M lenses are valued at 750 euros. I think these numbers probably give a better view of what these lenses actually cost Leica in an actuarial sense. The numbers are pretty interesting (though from 2011). I think this also demonstrates that it is not impossible for LLL to build a 35mm APO quality lens for a much lower price without skimping on quality. Certainly their labor is cheaper, but I think that is probably less important than market positioning.

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 agree on the change of direction regarding the shift to a more luxury brand, it is definitely the case. Of all the lenses Leica has released, the 35mm APO M for me is the most overpriced in relation to it's optics. I owned one and sold it solely for this reason. Voigtlander APO lenses give you all the performance for a 10th of the price so that is the direction I went in. I tend to buy vintage Leica glass for the character and nostalgia and Voigtlander/3rd party for measurable performance.  I'm sure this LLL option will also deliver optically. I just have concerns over their quality control and with them not having a European presence, it makes me less keen to invest in their offerings.

Edited April 10 by costa43

[TomB_tx]

2 hours ago, costa43 said:

I'm sure this LLL option will also deliver optically. I just have concerns over their quality control and with them not having a European presence, it makes me less keen to invest in their offerings.

Yes, their Q/C has yet to be proven. I've bought both the 35 8 element (no complaints) and the 50 "Rigid" - which needed focus calibration. I don't really worry about warranty or customer support - prefer to use DAG for any issues.