What the lower priced, Chinese/Japanese lenses do (knockoff or original), is create a lower entry point to the Leica ecosystem. When I first started shooting Leica I justified the price of the M8 with getting cheaper Voigtlander lenses with it. When I bought the M9 I still didn’t have any Leica lenses at the beginning. The cheaper entry point brought me to the ecosystem, which only helped Leica in the end. I still see plenty of people shooting M-240s/M10s/M11s, with nothing but third party lenses. I have no doubt the Light Lens Lab type companies are producing a net gain to Leica. This is before the thought of gaining potential Q and SL customers
I have no doubt Leica has thought about a 28 APO, if the optical design is close to what Voigtlander put out, will they be accused of copying Voigtlander when that releases? Better yet, what happens if LLL beats them out with a 28?
QC hasn’t been as good in recent years as the 90s/early 2000s, but still Leica is obviously considered better quality than especially the Chinese counterparts. I don’t see the competition as a bad thing in this case as like many others have said, some users are ok paying the premium for the better quality product, but the cheaper option still brings users to the ecosystem that would otherwise not be there
EMH2025 wrote:
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.
Whether you like, LLL, whether it is good enough in the real world being a little bit better or worse than Leica, whether it meets shooters needs at a different point, all those things are different than the point I was making. The only point I made was that Jonas is a hype machine for pretty much everything he shoots.
There are different levels of subjectivity and hype in reviewers. A lot of Youtubers are especially bad. Some reviewers, like Fred on FM are especially measured and informative. So I will wait and trust from a more measured technical reviewer than a hype machine.
And for the record, I’m not in the market for this type of lens from any maker. But I love what LLL is doing.
For a company like Leica that is positioned as a luxury brand, I'm not sure that they want this lower entry point to their system as it diminishes the exclusivity of the brand, eats into their margins on the volume that they do sell if they have to lower their prices, and puts them into closer competition with the likes of Sony/Nikon/Canon. They may not have a choice at some point regardless of if LLL exists or not.
But I don't run either Leica or LLL's business. I'm just a hobbyist trying to maximize the enjoyment of this hobby within a reasonable budget. I'm super on the fence on pre-ordering this in a few days, with the main question for me being what the long-term support is and if it happens to be a bust when delivered, how straight forward the return process is. I have the summilux FLE for when I want that fast aperture and honestly don't find it all that big compared to my old Sony gear, but the performance of the APO seems appealing.
They didn't align the mount (the lenses didn't have caps) and it's obvious the Leica lens protrudes less from the rear. Likely the extra element from the LLL makes it protude more inside the camera. I've aligned the mount here for us to see.
I'm actually starting to warm up to the smooth focus-barrel version without focus knurling. It's definitely a cleaner design.
Something else I noticed in the paperwork I received: the lens hood is listed as an "E39 screw-on hood". That may mean the magnetic hood we have seen is only a test prototype, with the final version using a screw-on hood instead. I'm not certain, but thought it was worth flagging.
KEY SPECIFICATIONS
Focal Length: 35mm
Aperture Range: f/2–f/16
Optical Design: 11 elements in 6 groups
Aspherical Elements: 4
Frame Coverage: 135 full frame, 36 × 24mm
Focusing System: Floating lens-element optical system
Focus Range: 0.3m to infinity
Diaphragm: Preset with half-increment lock settings
Aperture Blades: 11
Mount: Leica M-Mount quick-change bayonet
Filter Thread: E39
Lens Hood: E39 screw-on hood
Length: Approximately 40.9mm without hood; 49.3mm with hood
Diameter: Approximately 53mm
Weight with Hood: Approximately 327g in aluminum; 360g in titanium
gammarART wrote:
I thought the magnetic hood only will come with the titanium version?
Where did you hear that? I hadn't seen anything suggesting the magnetic hood would be exclusive to the titanium version. Hopefully, I'll be able to confirm this with LLL soon.
RomanMF wrote:
I don’t get the Titanium finish lust tbh. They look a bit odd on Black or Chrome bodies.
I see what you mean. However, titanium is not simply a different color or finish, it is an entirely different metal, and that comes through in the way the lens feels in use. The difference can be subtle, but aluminum, brass, and titanium each have their own distinct weight, texture, and tactile character when you handle and operate the lens. The exception is some Leica 'titanium' lenses, which are actually aluminum with a titanium-colored finish rather than lenses made of titanium.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Where did you hear that? I hadn't seen anything suggesting the magnetic hood would be exclusive to the titanium version. Hopefully, I'll be able to confirm this with LLL soon.
As I posted a couple pages back, I had read on a Chinese website from the translation, that only the titanium version would have (or offer) the magnetic hood while other versions will have a screw in hood. Whether that still holds true or not is hard to say with feedback that not everyone is happy with the magnetic hood design. I don't know if this decision to incorporate it has changed. The site also went over the choice of smooth or knurled aperture ring and shipping dates of these various versions and color which has subsequently been posted.
I imagine the finish is a bit more durable as well or am I wrong on that? Fred Miranda wrote:
I see what you mean. However, titanium is not simply a different color or finish, it is an entirely different metal, and that comes through in the way the lens feels in use. The difference can be subtle, but aluminum, brass, and titanium each have their own distinct weight, texture, and tactile character when you handle and operate the lens. The exception is some Leica 'titanium' lenses, which are actually aluminum with a titanium-colored finish rather than lenses made of titanium.
'titanium alloys used in lens barrels are highly resistant to surface damage, offering exceptional tensile strength, superior scratch and dent protection compared to soft aluminum, and complete immunity to rust or sweat corrosion.
Grade 5 and aerospace titanium alloys provide rigid surface durability that resists everyday scuffs and abrasions much better than standard consumer aluminum.
True structural titanium lens barrels are rare and typically reserved for ultra-high-end specialty or cinema optics due to the extreme difficulty and expense of machining the metal.'
