rscheffler wrote:
Both in and out of warranty work? I guess it's a good thing compared to having to send back to China. But checking the Red Dot Repair website doesn't reveal much information. Such as: where are they located?
I'm unsure about this because I didn't receive specific details. This situation began when I reached out to David to ask about getting my Panchro lens serviced due to its 'sticky' focusing rotation and play when changing the focus direction.
It appears that I may send it to Red Dot Repair, but I'm not certain, and I will provide further updates in this discussion.
highdesertmesa wrote:
LLL could generate a much higher level of trust in quality if they sent all their NA market lenses to Red Dot Repairs first to verify the lenses are centered and properly calibrated with the rangefinder. I’d pay a bit more for that peace of mind. I’m sure Popflash wouldn’t mind not having to process as many exchanges as well.
Honestly, I think they could handle this task at the factory, and there's probably some level of calibration already in place. However, doing this would demand a significant amount of labor and could potentially lead to higher costs for these lenses, which might not be a wise choice for LLL.
rscheffler wrote:
But checking the Red Dot Repair website doesn't reveal much information. Such as: where are they located?
The difference between LLL and Red Dot Repair is that you can find out anything you want about Red Dot Repair through the better business bureau. Location. Owner. Everything.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Honestly, I think they could handle this task at the factory, and there's probably some level of calibration already in place. However, doing this would demand a significant amount of labor and could potentially lead to higher costs for these lenses, which might not be a wise choice for LLL.
How many LLL lenses do people get that are off center and not calibrated properly? Are there a lot of complaints about that?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm unsure about this because I didn't receive specific details. This situation began when I reached out to David to ask about getting my Panchro lens serviced due to its 'sticky' focusing rotation and play when changing the focus direction.
It appears that I may send it to Red Dot Repair, but I'm not certain, and I will provide further updates in this discussion.
This would really bother me.
I buy a lens from you. Then when I have problems, which is what I was talking about before, where do I send it? Why can’t it be “I sold it to you, send it to me and I’ll deal with it”.
This was my entire argument when I started my thread about who is LLL.
So now I have a problem. I bought my 50 LLL lens. It’s sticking. I contact David which is the only contact I can get a hold of. And he tells me to send it to some place in Oregon. Some independent place to fix my lens. Will I get it serviced in warranty? Does it have a warranty? Will they honor it? Is David the only contact? What if this service guy screws it up or doesn’t service it properly or I’m somehow dissatisfied with the service. Where do I go then? Keep dealing with Jadon Rosado in Oregon? Or contact David the violinist in Canada? Or can I get a hold of someone at Light Lens Lab Corporate if there’s such a thing? Because $2,000 for a lens is no small thing.
Now it all starts unraveling.
I understand this is small independent manufacturers and it’s just the way it is. But if I pay $2,000 for some fancy paint LLL and this is where I end up I wouldn’t be very happy.
Keep us posted of this entire process on getting your LLL lens serviced.
I wonder what would happen if I buy one here where I am. I think probably contact a place called Geekster. And god knows where they’ll send me.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm unsure about this because I didn't receive specific details. This situation began when I reached out to David to ask about getting my Panchro lens serviced due to its 'sticky' focusing rotation and play when changing the focus direction.
It appears that I may send it to Red Dot Repair, but I'm not certain, and I will provide further updates in this discussion.
Have you tried focusing without the focus tabs? It puts too much leverage on the barrel and can make the focusing feel sticky and/or heavy and uneven. Using just the ring, it feels like any other lens.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Have you tried focusing without the focus tabs? It puts too much leverage on the barrel and can make the focusing feel sticky and/or heavy and uneven. Using just the ring, it feels like any other lens.
Yes, it's still not ideal. The ring seems to rotate fine, but when I try to focus precisely with the RF, it becomes a bit sticky and it's challenging to get the focus just right. To improve this, the lens simply needs to be lubricated again, maybe with a very soft helicoid lubricant like the Polar Bear Camera grade "00."
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, it's still not ideal. The ring seems to rotate fine, but when I try to focus precisely with the RF, it becomes a bit sticky and it's challenging to get the focus just right. To improve this, the lens simply needs to be lubricated again, maybe with a very soft helicoid lubricant like the Polar Bear Camera grade "00."
Mine was also very sticky and uneven when I first got it. And it definitely felt even more sticky when using the focus tabs.
I rotated the focus ring back and forth lens detached from the body and it helped a lot.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Have you tried focusing without the focus tabs? It puts too much leverage on the barrel and can make the focusing feel sticky and/or heavy and uneven. Using just the ring, it feels like any other lens.
I also changed the way how I hold my fingers with the tabs. I avoid the tips of the antlers and squeeze them from both sides. I think it decreases the leverage and actually gives quite precise focusing.
Quite different from traditional focus tab which I would operate with one finger at the center of the tab.
I haven’t kept track, but it seems like he keeps very few lenses for long. Can’t understand his criticism of f/2.8 being too soft for video, more like not enough DOF and/or missed focus. It definitely is a long lens for 50mm M, but not like that’s any surprise. I want to tell him, just sell your lens, dude, you don’t need an excuse for G.A.S. We understand.
algrove wrote:
It came from Peter Coulson who thought it had too much flair and then Mr Leica (Osborne) agreed and sold it. I like what it offers.
Likely due to very specific commercial needs that don't align. Osborne often says a lens might be "too clinical" and wants something more artistic but then pulls back as if to say, "not that artistic".
The flare is one of the reasons to use it, IMO.
Even the new SP3 series has the same purple/blue flare: ?t=757
And not even 10 seconds into Cooke's own demo reel for the SP3s, they have a flare shot with the 100mm.
highdesertmesa wrote:
I haven’t kept track, but it seems like he keeps very few lenses for long. Can’t understand his criticism of f/2.8 being too soft for video, more like not enough DOF and/or missed focus. It definitely is a long lens for 50mm M, but not like that’s any surprise. I want to tell him, just sell your lens, dude, you don’t need an excuse for G.A.S. We understand.
I think that some number of his fans would want to know each of the the reasons to be listed, and explained. It is expected. Such is the life of a you-tuber; one’s fans expect consistency. Notably, he emphasizes that his fans should not automatically dump their LLL Speed Panchro lenses.
Personally, I have yet to acquire any LLL lenses. The Speed Panchro has been the most tempting, thus far.
I am not being critical of Matt Osborne. He has a successful Youtube channel, and I wish him continued success.
Most reviewers seem to like the character of the LLL 50/2 SP2 lens. However, some find it soft, but in reality, it produces images with low contrast and is prone to veiling, which I think it's a good combination. There are many classic 50/2 lenses that create a similar look, but what sets the SP2 apart is that it remains sharp even with the low contrast effect. In fact, it's sharp and can capture fine details from the center to the corners, maintaining consistency across the entire image. Similar to the 35/1.4 Lux pre-asph's look in a 50mm focal length.
Personally, I prefer the images from the SP2 over the 50/1.4 Lux lens with Peter Karbe's signature.
