whiteonline wrote:
The new Corvette Z06/ZR1outperform the Ferrari at a fraction of the cost using the same innovations and have zero effect on sales.
If someone is seriously contemplating the Leica APO at full price, a less expensive "copy" will not sway that decision.
I think where he is getting at is that this lens is technically a replica of the Leica 35 cron APO but with an extra element added so it is not a literal copy of the design. It looks like they are doing just enough to legally dodge copyright/patent issues. It's a fair sentiment compared to the likes of Voigtlander, who releases lenses that are comparable to Leica glass, but are fully independet lens designs. To use the car analogy as an example, it would be like if Chevy took the overall engineering design of a ferrari engine, chasis, suspension, etc etc, re-routed the exhaust pipe and added a couple other superficial parts, manufactured it themselves, changed the body a bit, and called it a vette. Instead, Chevy designed their own mid-engine vette and pitted it against the ferrari. It's a different thing altogether.
I think more people would have beef with this if Leica were not price gouging everyone.
The 35mm APO should be nice. Not sure that it particularly appeals to me, but I'll have to see more photo samples. The images, so far, seem to show a rendering that is very clean, precise and modern.
Now for a lens that couldn't be more different - the 50mm f/1.2 '1966.'
Civilisation progresses widely because firms and individuals copy breakthrough developments in all fields of endeavour.
'Numerous optical manufacturers copied or adapted the iconic Zeiss Sonnar (asymmetrical, fewer glass-to-air surfaces) and Planar (symmetrical double-Gauss) layouts. Post-WWII reparations, expired patents, and the drive for cheap, bright standard lenses led to widespread global adoption.'
Thypoch got a mention above. They appeared in 2023 (LLL and Viltrox arose in 2018). They followed the same design-development pathway as LLL here, using M lenses for the 35mm and 50mm Simeras and a Cosina design for the 21mm. The 28mm and 75mm look like cine designs to me, maybe from parent company DZOFilm.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Jonas is skilled but a hype machine. I don't trust his reviews.
Most of the prominent reviewers whether LLL, Nikon, Leica, Canon etc are pros and have some connection to what they are reviewing, disclaimer aside. I treat them as advertisements. We see advertisements all the time for products we like. . No reviewer ever photographs as anyone else would, subject light circumstance it is at best indicative, and the indicative looks very good, to meet and maybe exceed the Leica 35/2. I have no doubt the lens is very well made as are the other LLL, and after using quite a few of them and especially the 1966, 35/1.4, the elcan ... I am sure it will do well in my hands. In the real world doesn't really matter if it is in the ball park +/- Leica. I am not into photographing walls, dolls etc. Likely most of us will get everything we need from the new LLL at a fraction of the cost of the Leica.
Most of them don't see well. The tell is that they can't articulate anything abstract in other than very general terms. Many appear to be on a mission to become more prominent, and many are fashion slaves, with various affectations.
We will soon see a lot of APO 'they look the same' comparisons in image pairs that have very little color, and have subjects somewhat into the middle distance. That is all well and good if they shoot that material that way, but you can't draw many conclusions from it.
We hear talk about the 'photographers eye' but think about it - why wouldn't you want to show people a set of scenarios outside your narrow range of personal work? I'm not knocking Alex, I like him, but to say there is remarkably little difference between Sony's GM 35mm and the LLL AA,
I cannot agree even based on what I see in his YT shown below. Maybe they are aiming at phone viewers? Maybe they and their audiences don't see too well, or are inexperienced or inept at what I call 'image analysis'. Take a look at around 3:20 onwards. I open up two tabs and look at the two, going back and forth. FWIW. cheers.
..
Mystik wrote:
I think where he is getting at is that this lens is technically a replica of the Leica 35 cron APO but with an extra element added so it is not a literal copy of the design. It looks like they are doing just enough to legally dodge copyright/patent issues. It's a fair sentiment compared to the likes of Voigtlander, who releases lenses that are comparable to Leica glass, but are fully independet lens designs. To use the car analogy as an example, it would be like if Chevy took the overall engineering design of a ferrari engine, chasis, suspension, etc etc, re-routed the exhaust pipe and added a couple other superficial parts, manufactured it themselves, changed the body a bit, and called it a vette. Instead, Chevy designed their own mid-engine vette and pitted it against the ferrari. It's a different thing altogether.
I think more people would have beef with this if Leica were not price gouging everyone.
Even if Leica is price gouging, unlike rereleasing a 50 year old lens or stale 20 year old design, this is a much more recent ~5 year old design that was a technical marvel when it came out that they reverse engineered and copied. Time makes a difference here - really kills any incentive to innovate - we'll get fewer innovative M-mount lenses this way and more knockoffs and rehashes of old designs.
Optical formulas aren't "marvels" in the era of CAD. Lens performance is a matter of making tradeoffs in price vs. cost. vs. size. Patents for optical formulas are very specific, and near-copies or slight variations are the norm. Literally any camera company could have come up with the 35mm APO-Summicron or similarly performant formula if they chose the same price, cost, size criteria. LLL's goal for their new approach with the 35APO is to show that they can change the game in the world of manufacturing. Leica's long waiting lists due to low production capacity are a thing of the past.
While I agree with the above, I can understand the gripe with this particular LLL product. I don't share it, mostly because I think Leica's prices are nuts, but I get it.
I don't think LLL will have a ton of impact on Leica's bottom line, but it won't be nothing.
raizans wrote:
Optical formulas aren't "marvels" in the era of CAD. Lens performance is a matter of making tradeoffs in price vs. cost. vs. size. Patents for optical formulas are very specific, and near-copies or slight variations are the norm. Literally any camera company could have come up with the 35mm APO-Summicron or similarly performant formula if they chose the same price, cost, size criteria. LLL's goal for their new approach with the 35APO is to show that they can change the game in the world of manufacturing. Leica's long waiting lists due to low production capacity are a thing of the past....Show more →
Are you sure what you're saying is true? If any manufacturer could have come up with this lens, then why hasn't someone done it before LLL? Why not create something novel instead of blatantly copy Leica's optical formula and look and feel?
---------------------------------------------
RomanMF wrote:
While I agree with the above, I can understand the gripe with this particular LLL product. I don't share it, mostly because I think Leica's prices are nuts, but I get it.
I don't think LLL will have a ton of impact on Leica's bottom line, but it won't be nothing.
I don't think it'll make a major impact to resale values - looking at the resale prices of the Leica 50mm f1.2 vs LLL 50mm f1.2 - there is a meaningful difference. I think the main issue is the sheer blatantness of this is really hard to ignore. In an industry already under long-term pressure, actions like this are what will eventually kill it.
tzhang4284 wrote:
If any manufacturer could have come up with this lens, then why hasn't someone done it before LLL? Why not create something novel instead of blatantly copy Leica's optical formula and look and feel?
Probably because LLL had a head start making M-mount lenses by DJ Optical. They started in 2019 or a bit earlier? No doubt they do the most business out of all the other white labels and can fund more ambitious projects.
tzhang4284 wrote:
Are you sure what you're saying is true? If any manufacturer could have come up with this lens, then why hasn't someone done it before LLL? Why not create something novel instead of blatantly copy Leica's optical formula and look and feel?
---------------------------------------------
I don't think it'll make a major impact to resale values - looking at the resale prices of the Leica 50mm f1.2 vs LLL 50mm f1.2 - there is a meaningful difference. I think the main issue is the sheer blatantness of this is really hard to ignore. In an industry already under long-term pressure, actions like this are what will eventually kill it....Show more →
I would not write off the long term value of the LLL 1966, it is my understanding from them directly that the glass used is no longer available and I will guess like Leica they found a hand grind economically challenging. I don't know how many copies they actually made, but it is a clone basically a reissue of the 1960s vintage lens. I think of all the LLL lenses this one actually has some long term appreciation potential. Not that I would buy one for investment, I have it and I like it and will use it, and perhaps my heirs will find it retained value, perhaps not. I did think the elcan might also be this when LLL announced it would not longer be produced but they are so its appreciation value is now much less. Time will tell if LLL remains committed to no more 1066 as a copy of the original formulation including the hand grind.
This is overly hyperbolic. People stealing lens designs from a luxury camera brand who produces goods that costs more than most can afford is not going to kill the industry, lol.
This industry is being squeezed by forces much larger than this. tzhang4284 wrote:
Are you sure what you're saying is true? If any manufacturer could have come up with this lens, then why hasn't someone done it before LLL? Why not create something novel instead of blatantly copy Leica's optical formula and look and feel?
---------------------------------------------
I don't think it'll make a major impact to resale values - looking at the resale prices of the Leica 50mm f1.2 vs LLL 50mm f1.2 - there is a meaningful difference. I think the main issue is the sheer blatantness of this is really hard to ignore. In an industry already under long-term pressure, actions like this are what will eventually kill it....Show more →
It's not a copy, and to think it is indicates a knowledge shortfall of optical science. As explained in my analysis of the lens's morphology, the elements have been altered substantially in their arrangement and shaping, well beyond what could be expected from the inclusion of the additional L3 - it's at p.95 #16.
LLL see the 35/2 APO-M from Leica as a stepping off point, nothing more - something to use as a basis for further improvement. Thypoch used the same approach, particularly with the Simera 50mm. They eradicated the midfield curvature at f1.4, among other gains. It's just what these firms do!
LLL set out to produce a similar lens to the 35/2 APO because it so impressed them that they set themselves the challenge of improving it. You might ask yourself how they could achieve such a thing unless they produced a true copy, down to the glass type selection, preparation - all of it.
Chinese lens makers have already amply demonstrated their ability to change the market landscape, in such a way as to meet with great success from discerning buyers. Success will always arouse acrimony.
Much credit goes to their mastery of optical glass, which of course is locally sourced and very different to that used by Leica. This alone renders this lens a completely different optic. Optical glass types vary by refractive index and dispersion (Abbe number). Changing the glass requires recalculating every surface curvature to keep light in focus.
The affordable price levels are to a large extent enabled by the structure, productivity level, constant innovation and improvement in the industrial sectors of the Chinese economy. It has many economists baffled, in fact, why this is so.
To bring yourself up to speed on the dramatic China-led changes in the global economy, you can view Kevin Walmsley's superb Inside China Business YouTube channel. It's a real eye opener, from an American asset manager thirteen years in China.
All in all, LLL (et al) is a wonderful development for consumers, at a time of serious global belt-tightening, something that will only worsen in short order. You might reflect on their plans to make a series of APO lenses at different focal lengths as well. Will they copy the Leica APO-Summicron-M 28/2? Leica's longer M-APOs are very old, and many would welcome a newcomer in those niches.
It is to be hoped that LLL consider a Noct 35/1.2 derivative at some stage, together with some classic Zeiss lenses. They are very effectively filling out the market, but you need some conceptual distance from a Leica-centric world view to see it.
Leica's longer M-APOs are very old, and many would welcome a newcomer in those niches.