Rigid is Rigid optical block replica in Rigid housing replica.
Pancho SPII is Cooke SPII optical block in Pancho housing replica. (11 aperture blades)
Rigid SPII is Cooke SPII optical block in Rigid housing replica. (8 aperture blades)
So, Rigid and Rigid SPII share same housing but different optics. Pancho SPII and Rigid SPII have different housings but share same optics (with different number of aperture blades).
gammarART wrote:
Anyone knows the difference(s) between the LLL Rigid and Rigid SP II and the Pancho SP II (aside from the external design)?
Nice thing about rigid SPII is its size and it is E39, so it provides a great character lens option in a small E39 kit to balance something like a 50/2 summicron and has a lot more character than lenses like an Elcan or Rigid both LLL and original.
ftllens wrote:
Rigid is Rigid optical block replica in Rigid housing replica.
Pancho SPII is Cooke SPII optical block in Pancho housing replica. (11 aperture blades)
Rigid SPII is Cooke SPII optical block in Rigid housing replica. (8 aperture blades)
So, Rigid and Rigid SPII share same housing but different optics. Pancho SPII and Rigid SPII have different housings but share same optics (with different number of aperture blades).
Appreciate the review and the info in this thread. I bought my first Leica and decided to go with this lens. I guess the Elcan would have been fine too based on the thoughts here. That's crazy about the panchro housing stuff, I'm glad I just got the "regular" rigid, I think. So far I've only tested it on GFX and it works great. (Leica is getting CLA'd)
ftllens wrote:
Rigid is Rigid optical block replica in Rigid housing replica.
Pancho SPII is Cooke SPII optical block in Pancho housing replica. (11 aperture blades)
Rigid SPII is Cooke SPII optical block in Rigid housing replica. (8 aperture blades)
So, Rigid and Rigid SPII share same housing but different optics. Pancho SPII and Rigid SPII have different housings but share same optics (with different number of aperture blades).
Worth noting that the SPII Panchro is single coated and the SPII Rigid is multicoated. Also the SPII Rigid body is modeled after the Rigid but is longer to accommodate the SPII optical design, and there may be other differences.
– LLL 50mm f/2 "SPII" (Cooke Speed Panchro II replica, single coated, 11 aperture blades)
– LLL 50mm f/2 "Rigid-SPII" (Cooke Speed Panchro replica optics in Rigid-style body, multicoated, 8 aperture blades)
– LLL 50mm f/2 "Rigid" (replica of the Leica Rigid, 10 aperture blades)
highdesertmesa wrote:
Worth noting that the SPII Panchro is single coated and the SPII Rigid is multicoated. Also the SPII Rigid body is modeled after the Rigid but is longer to accommodate the SPII optical design, and there may be other differences.
– LLL 50mm f/2 "SPII" (Cooke Speed Panchro II replica, single coated, 11 aperture blades)
– LLL 50mm f/2 "Rigid-SPII" (Cooke Speed Panchro replica optics in Rigid-style body, multicoated, 8 aperture blades)
– LLL 50mm f/2 "Rigid" (replica of the Leica Rigid, 10 aperture blades)
Just to add another layer to the confusion, they now also have a third "Rigid" style barrel design:
• LLL 50mm f/1.9 "Rigid-ZS6", based on a Dallmeyer optical design. *Review coming soon.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Just to add another layer to the confusion, they now also have a third "Rigid" style barrel design:
• LLL 50mm f/1.9 "Rigid-ZS6", based on a Dallmeyer optical design. *Review coming soon.
Yeah, since they announced they're going to use the Rigid housing to host a series of classic lens replicas, the list may get pretty long!
The ZS6 images so far look more interesting than what we've gotten so far from LLL in the Rigid housing – looking forward to your review.
I haven't shot anything worth posting yet, but the Rigid Leica replica looks really nice on the GFX in any of the aspect ratios that exclude the far corners. I may also try the 75 SPII since they advertise it as covering 44x33.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Yeah, since they announced they're going to use the Rigid housing to host a series of classic lens replicas, the list may get pretty long!
The ZS6 images so far look more interesting than what we've gotten so far from LLL in the Rigid housing – looking forward to your review.
I haven't shot anything worth posting yet, but the Rigid Leica replica looks really nice on the GFX in any of the aspect ratios that exclude the far corners. I may also try the 75 SPII since they advertise it as covering 44x33.
I was amazed by how closely the Light Lens Lab 50mm f/2 "Rigid" matched the rendering and performance of the original Leica. It really captured much of the same character and overall look. It also seems the LLL 50mm f/2 'Rigid' is now sold out for good, so definitely hold on to your copy.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I was amazed by how closely the Light Lens Lab 50mm f/2 "Rigid" matched the rendering and performance of the original Leica. It really captured much of the same character and overall look. It also seems the LLL 50mm f/2 “Rigid is now sold out for good, so definitely hold on to your copy.
I’m a bit confused, you mean the Summicron Rigid replica or the SP II?
Do you find the SP II closer to the original Summicron than their replica?
Sonnar-7 wrote:
I’m a bit confused, you mean the Summicron Rigid replica or the SP II?
Do you find the SP II closer to the original Summicron than their replica?
I meant the LLL 'Rigid' compared to the original Leica 50/2 Cron Rigid. The performance and rendering are very close based on the review I posted. Personally, I actually prefer when Light Lens Lab doesn't try to improve the original design in any way, since it's the imperfections and quirks of those older lenses that make them so interesting in the first place.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I meant the LLL 'Rigid' compared to the original Leica 50/2 Cron Rigid. The performance and rendering are very close based on the review I posted. Personally, I actually prefer when Light Lens Lab doesn't try to improve the original design in any way, since it's the imperfections and quirks of those older lenses that make them so interesting in the first place.
Ah, I understand. I remember that some time ago you advised me to look for a Summicron rigid as you thought it did fit my taste in lens, I did look at a ton of photos at the time and in the meanwhile never found one that was fairly priced and in good shape.
When I heard that LLL was about to make a remake of it, I patiently waited and bought one.
It’s indeed a great lens, but I thought that they did improve too much on the coatings once more since I barely could make it flare and I remembered that what I liked about the photos of the rigid I had seen were the orange artefacts it could produce.
That’s what I thought until a friend of mine did lend me its original rigid that it didn’t flare like I saw on those pictures.
I guess that there are some variations regarding that characteristic.
Well, I do agree with you, I do like when LLL make some replicas and do work hard to keep the imperfections, that being said, I think I don’t mind the extra center sharpness of their 1966, it helps with the rendering and everything else is there.
I wish they would do more of those replicas, and some more classics likes they used to.
Sonnar-7 wrote:
Ah, I understand. I remember that some time ago you advised me to look for a Summicron rigid as you thought it did fit my taste in lens, I did look at a ton of photos at the time and in the meanwhile never found one that was fairly priced and in good shape.
When I heard that LLL was about to make a remake of it, I patiently waited and bought one.
It’s indeed a great lens, but I thought that they did improve too much on the coatings once more since I barely could make it flare and I remembered that what I liked about the photos of the rigid I had seen were the orange artefacts it could produce.
That’s what I thought until a friend of mine did lend me its original rigid that it didn’t flare like I saw on those pictures.
I guess that there are some variations regarding that characteristic.
Well, I do agree with you, I do like when LLL make some replicas and do work hard to keep the imperfections, that being said, I think I don’t mind the extra center sharpness of their 1966, it helps with the rendering and everything else is there.
I wish they would do more of those replicas, and some more classics likes they used to. ...Show more →
You could always ask DAG if he can chemically remove or polish off the coatings from the front element of your LLL copy.
If you're looking for ring flare, you could try a silver Leica or LLL UV filter.
highdesertmesa wrote:
You could always ask DAG if he can chemically remove or polish off the coatings from the front element of your LLL copy.
If you're looking for ring flare, you could try a silver Leica or LLL UV filter.
Could be quite interesting indeed. I never noticed that a silver ring or filter could manage to produce some ring flares, the lenses I have that produce some are pitch black. Good to know though if it can achieve that.
Sonnar-7 wrote:
Could be quite interesting indeed. I never noticed that a silver ring or filter could manage to produce some ring flares, the lenses I have that produce some are pitch black. Good to know though if it can achieve that.
Re: silver filter – Just something you could try for fun – I have no idea if it would work.
