This 35mm APO lens from Light Lens Lab looks very similar to the original Leica lens. However, their optical designs are different: it has 11 elements in 6 groups, while the Leica lens has 10 elements in 5 groups.
I have a 35mm F2 eight-element lens from the LLL series. I’m very satisfied with both its optical quality and mechanical construction. Here are some photos taken using this lens for your reference: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/658112/1746#17089910
Even if a lens had the exact same elements and groupings, exact same dimensions, my understanding is that the glasses used will typically be very different, such that light rays will not use the same 'transport routes' to the sensor.
You would need to duplicate the exact refractive indexes and Abbe numbers of the glass. It might be akin to two men of the same height and weight, but you can't call them identical. But even Leica does not do that in their revisions, designers are always looking for improvements in some aspect or another.
Google AI: .You cannot produce an exact optical copy. Even if two different glass stocks share the exact same refractive index and primary Abbe number - their partial dispersions across individual wavelengths will differ because their internal chemical compositions are unique.'
The only two serious makers doing this are Thypoch and LLL, and it's a bit of a tightrope walk, I'm sure. We see small shape variations and very often quite different glass types. For example, the Simera 35/1.4 has no APD glass, but the (probable) source 2022 Summilux uses 'several elements with anomalous partial dispersion'.
Optical science is messy, 2nd and third order aberrations etc. They always look to improve.
david6908 wrote:
This 35mm APO lens from Light Lens Lab looks very similar to the original Leica lens. However, their optical designs are different: it has 11 elements in 6 groups, while the Leica lens has 10 elements in 5 groups.
I have a 35mm F2 eight-element lens from the LLL series. I’m very satisfied with both its optical quality and mechanical construction. Here are some photos taken using this lens for your reference: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/658112/1746#17089910
Light Lens Lab is claiming it will perform similarly to the Leica overall, and actually better in the corners. As far as rendering and actual axial CA control, only a comparison can say for sure.
Common belief is that the LLL 28/2.8 9-Element is classic and a bit soft, but it's surprisingly sharper than the modern Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar! What sets it apart is its cooler tones, flare handling, and slightly lower contrast. It’s definitely bulkier than the Skopar, but I just prefer the images coming out of it.
tzhang4284 wrote:
But the problem is the LLL 35mm APO is pretty much a straight ripoff - one lens inserted in the formula and some small cosmetic changes.
is this a certainty? i thought it's a speculation? LLL hasn't published the lens design diagram anywhere AFAIK.
dalegaspi wrote:
is this a certainty? i thought it's a speculation? LLL hasn't published the lens design diagram anywhere AFAIK.
This has been discussed on the official thread, but it's worth noting the LLL 35mm f/2 APO isn't a straight copy. At first glance you might assume it's a clone since the styling is so close, but it actually has 11 elements versus the Leica's 10, and the element shapes differ too, so optically it's its own design rather than a replica. That said, I think it's fair to say LLL clearly took inspiration from the Leica lens overall, and even more so in the barrel and hood aesthetics, where the family resemblance is pretty obvious.
Hi all, I know the new hotness right now is the 35/2 APO, but I ended up finding the elusive 40/2 "Hua" lens that was announced and then had some discussion and seemingly vanished. I was following user @ByChrisJones tip for grabbing a significant discount by combining the Shop App deal for $115 off a LLL purchase and the FREDMIRANDA discount code (works by the way, I finally bit on the 50/1.9) when i saw a listing for the 40/2 from a company called "Kamerahaus" that apparently is in NY. The lens was listed cheap at $249 with 1 in stock and I figured let me order it and see what happens. I ordered it Monday and it just arrived at my door tonight.
I have only pictures of the lens, as it arrived after it was dark so will update later once I have some samples to show. The lens has a slightly rough but otherwise well dampened focus that goes down to 0.5m with no bump/detent at 0.7 like some other lenses. The aperture ring is also slightly rough and has quiet clicks going from f2-f16.
Time will tell what the rendering actually looks like, but at least now there is some sort of confirmation that this lens is indeed real.
Curious what your copy is like. According to the description, this lens is basically a "free gift" for returning customers, as such, it is supposedly made from scrap parts and spare lens elements- essentially from whatever they found in that junk drawer. The sale page also lists this as a reason that a return/refund is not accepted. Can you comment on the optics and physical state? Is it scratched, aligned, etc?
I wouldn't be surprised if I bought one that behaves entirely different than you copy. LMFAO.
Curious how it performs. Where is the sale page mentioned above? Sorry, I haven't seen, that's my favorite focal length, and my five LLL lenses evidently don't count for returning customers?
blessingx wrote:
Curious how it performs. Where is the sale page mentioned above? Sorry, I haven't seen, that's my favorite focal length, and my five LLL lenses evidently don't count for returning customers?
I'm not sure how they decided the people/stores that received these. This store very well could have received this as a trade in or something.
dumplinknet wrote:
Curious what your copy is like. According to the description, this lens is basically a "free gift" for returning customers, as such, it is supposedly made from scrap parts and spare lens elements- essentially from whatever they found in that junk drawer. The sale page also lists this as a reason that a return/refund is not accepted. Can you comment on the optics and physical state? Is it scratched, aligned, etc?
I wouldn't be surprised if I bought one that behaves entirely different than you copy. LMFAO.
The lens seems to be pretty clean, there is one small speck of dust that looks like it might be behind the front element but other than that the lens looks pretty much new. I'm not sure what the exact specifics ended up being with the lens but quality seems to be a lot better than early rumors were implying, especially for $250 (I don't know if that was the actual original cost)
I was able to step out during some harsh light ~1pm today for some quick snaps. Hopefully soon I will be able to get some more shots in ideal lighting.
The lens seems like it can be pretty sharp in the center, I have included some crops as Flickr likes to compress a lot and loses some sharpness. On my 42" OLED zoomed in I can see fine details, at least in the shots where I had good focus. There is some barrel distortion, I played around with lens-profile corrections and the Summilux 31/1.4 seemed to be a good match but I haven't spent a ton of time experimenting. Meta data shows it as this lens but that was due to forgetting to remove lens selection in-camera and the profile was removed before export.
All the pics are wide open at f2, at rangefinder 0.7 MFD, at lens 0.5 MFD, or infinity; SOOTC just imported into LR with the M11 profile and then exported as JPEG-Large.
Well, that's a good start in poor light: good balance, true to life appearance, there is a certain pictorial sweetness. Fine green-yellow tone differentiation and lively color, a pleasant 'airiness.' For an 35mm APO, the bokeh is good indeed, I like the focus fade. As a suggestion, try resizing images for posting to 1500x1000px.
There are some excellent images on the lens's web page:
damonnomonon wrote:
LLL just showed a new prototype on their insta. 35mm 7-element replica. Unlike Mandler, I’m assuming they’ll try to actually replicate.
Looks like it will have an ASPH element. I’ll just keep saying this: the original KOB isn’t a very interesting lens. Any attempt to make a variant that improves on its flaws (perhaps this LLL version) or makes it more quirky (the Mandler version) is welcome. I much preferred the early ASPH 35 Cron I had over my KOB. The KOB’s bokeh would have been way easier to “learn to love” if the lens had been sharper in the mid frame for placing subjects off center when shooting at close distance wide open. The Mandler just embraced that and said, no, keep your subjects in the center, but we’ll at least make the center sharper and the bokeh more unusual. Perhaps LLL is going the opposite direction, giving us a flatter field, sharp wide open, and keeping the subdued bokeh. Just a guess on my part, but that’s what I’d hope for.
Some more shots with the 40/2 "Hua". I noticed more flare this time around with a couple instances of ugly flare. I might try out the 8e hood to see if that helps next time I'm out. Overall I really like the lens. These have been edited unlike the previous set and were again taken midday wide open. I have tried exporting at 1500 by ~1000 as suggested to see if that improves previews vs the previous full res uploads to Flickr.
