JohnKraus wrote:
Still deciding if worth purchasing the LLL 11873 while owning the 35 FLEII. For those who own both...
Main question- can I achieve mostly the same look, taking into account thoughts on bringing down clarity/structure in Capture One and potentially adding a 1/4 promist or glimmerglass?
Or.. do you appreciate owning both and find each worthwhile.. and why?
Many of my favorite reviewers talk up the 11873 (jonas rask, matt osborne, kevin fickling, etc). But I still can't quite see how it surpasses the FLEII. When it seems I can closely emulate the 11873, by lowering clarity/structure/ detail.... while also having the option of the FLE's crisp modern, bold character which I love. (this in regards to people shooting.. not landscapes)
One never knows with a new lens release if at least part of the praise relates to the newest tool/toy on the block. ...Show more →
John,
Taking price out of the equation, I see this as a pretty easy choice. The Leica has a more structured rendering, with more outlining and rounded highlight edges, which actually reminds me of the original Leica 35/1.4 AA. The Light Lens Lab feels closer to the Leica 35mm f/1.4 "pre-FLE", with less resolution and contrast, and a smoother overall draw.
I say it's straightforward because it really comes down to personal preference. Only you can decide which rendering speaks to you. If price does matter, then the decision becomes much easier.
I've tested the 35/1.4 FLE and the LLL 35/1.4 side by side, and I can get the FLE to look quite close to the LLL by dialing contrast to around -15, clarity to about -5, and shifting WB tint to roughly -9, since the Leica tends to lean more magenta. Unless you're closely analyzing specular highlights, which still render differently, the images can look very similar overall. I even made a preset with these settings, and it's pretty amazing how with one click I can get close to the LLL look from the FLE when I want it, especially for portraits where I tend to prefer that output.
Fred: That sounds really interesting. Do you happen to have shots from both where you can show that? I’d really be curious.
In that case, doing the opposite with Contrast+ and Clarity+ on the LLL should get you something close to a FLE look 🤔
icarus_ wrote:
Had some nice angular light hitting the windows this morning, got a nice product pic of the titanium AA. The titanium lens on a black body is a very handsome combo.
I don't think it works that way, but an interesting posit someone with a LLL 11873 could test out. However.. adding sharpness, micro contrast, clarity to a file lacking in it originally will not improve the detail and clarity that were never there, IMHO.
gammarART wrote:
Fred: That sounds really interesting. Do you happen to have shots from both where you can show that? I’d really be curious.
In that case, doing the opposite with Contrast+ and Clarity+ on the LLL should get you something close to a FLE look 🤔
gammarART wrote:
Fred: That sounds really interesting. Do you happen to have shots from both where you can show that? I’d really be curious.
In that case, doing the opposite with Contrast+ and Clarity+ on the LLL should get you something close to a FLE look 🤔
Sure, here are some side by side comparisons:
All images use the Adobe Standard profile with identical settings, including sharpening. The only difference is the preset change I mentioned earlier. (around -15, clarity to about -5, and shifting WB tint to roughly -9)
Sample 1:
a) Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical (default)
b) Leica 35mm f/1.4 FLE (default)
c) Same as a), Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical (default)
d) Leica 35mm f/1.4 FLE with preset applied
a) Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical (default)
LEICA M10-RSummilux-M 1:1.4/35 ASPH. 11873 lens35mm1/4000s100 ISO-0.7 EV
b) Leica 35mm f/1.4 FLE (default)
LEICA M10-RSummilux-M 1:1.4/35 ASPH. FLE lens35mm1/4000s100 ISO-0.7 EV
c) Same as a), Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical (default)
LEICA M10-RSummilux-M 1:1.4/35 ASPH. 11873 lens35mm1/4000s100 ISO-0.7 EV
d) Leica 35mm f/1.4 FLE with preset applied
LEICA M10-RSummilux-M 1:1.4/35 ASPH. FLE lens35mm1/4000s100 ISO-0.7 EV
So the overall "look" gets more similar when using the preset on the Leica 35mm f/1.4 FLE images, but on close inspection, and less noticeable in resized images, the rendering of specular highlights and field curvature shape still remains distinct.
How long has it been taking for LLL to ship these lenses after ordering? I placed my order on March 5 for the chrome/aluminum version but it has not been shipped yet. I know that it does sometimes take a while - just curious to get a feel for the time frame.
It really makes it hard to choose the FLE — at least based on those two comparison shots, I honestly wouldn’t know why I should pay two to three times as much for the Leica. Especially since, personally, I like the bokeh toward the edges quite a bit less there.
A comparison with the 11874 would really be interesting here. That lens has something very unique about it, if you ask me…
Abuttolph wrote:
How long has it been taking for LLL to ship these lenses after ordering? I placed my order on March 5 for the chrome/aluminum version but it has not been shipped yet. I know that it does sometimes take a while - just curious to get a feel for the time frame.
I ordered mine (chrome/alu) 2 Feb, ran into their holiday and finally got it delivered to Germany last week. Due some issues with FedEx and a wrong declaration by LLL ($30 value?!) I only received it yesterday. I was surprised that my sample seems to back-focus by about 5-10cm. After some more practice today I got more keepers. I like the feel of the focusing ring of my Voigtländer an Thypoch lenses more. I will give it a few more weeks before deciding what to do - keep it or put it into ebay.
I had the same problem with customs during delivery. LLL has a new service provider handling the shipping. This service provider provided incorrect details without LLL being aware of it. At least, that’s what they told me. I tested my copy thoroughly yesterday. It’s perfectly aligned. The imaging characteristics are exactly as described in most reviews. It’s a really great lens with a very distinctive look and goes very well with the Voigtländer Nokton 50mm 1.2, which produces a slightly similar image wide open.
sumerland wrote:
I ordered mine (chrome/alu) 2 Feb, ran into their holiday and finally got it delivered to Germany last week. Due some issues with FedEx and a wrong declaration by LLL ($30 value?!) I only received it yesterday. I was surprised that my sample seems to back-focus by about 5-10cm. After some more practice today I got more keepers. I like the feel of the focusing ring of my Voigtländer an Thypoch lenses more. I will give it a few more weeks before deciding what to do - keep it or put it into ebay.
Thanks for the info and for relating our experience both with the shipment and the lens. I wonder how much time the error in the declaration and FedEx issues cost in terms of time. Mine has not been shipped yet according to the order status on the LLL website, but hopefully it will be shipped within the next couple of weeks.
Have you contacted them regarding the back-focus problem?
paulleica wrote:
I had the same problem with customs during delivery. LLL has a new service provider handling the shipping. This service provider provided incorrect details without LLL being aware of it. At least, that’s what they told me. I tested my copy thoroughly yesterday. It’s perfectly aligned. The imaging characteristics are exactly as described in most reviews. It’s a really great lens with a very distinctive look and goes very well with the Voigtländer Nokton 50mm 1.2, which produces a slightly similar image wide open.
Thanks for the information. It seems that they are having some issues with the shipment details, at least for Germany as you are the second person in this thread reporting the same issue.
Good to know that yours is perfectly aligned though. I wonder if yours is from a newer production batch with better calibration than previous batches.
I look very forward to receiving the lens and working with it. The Voigtlander Nokton 50/1.2 is one of my favorite lenses and I love the idea that these two will work well to have together.
Abuttolph wrote:
Have you contacted them regarding the back-focus problem?
No, I haven't. I doubt I will receive an answer. Here is why: While waiting for the lens to ship I was wondering more and more, if the purchase was a good decision. The reports about focus issues in this forum and the hazzle of returning a potentially faulty lens to China (including claiming the tax back) finally made me write an email to their support. I asked them two questions. First, if they were aware of the focus issue reported here. Second, if they (now that they had been made aware that complaints exist) would take care that my sample will focus correctly. If they cannot confirm this, I would like to cancel my order (which they offered previously due to the long holiday break). I did not receive an answer but a week later my item was shipped.
In addition, my lens arrived with a small scratch next to one of the screws on the lens mount. I expect they would claim the lens showed signs of usage and would not refund the full price.
That's why I will keep it for now. Focussing with the Visoflex on digital solves the issue. I will practice more before using it on film. If I cannot achieve consistent results using the finder I will try to remove the mount and see if some aluminum foil might help.
P.S.: Don't get me wrong, it takes beautiful photos...
After a lot of emails back and forth with David, my third copy of the titanium 11873, numbered 104/300, is finally focusing correctly at MFD and at infinity wide open.
I also received another copy back from David today, but no luck on my end. I'm going to give up on this lens for now and just ask for a refund. I really wanted this to work out.
I still haven't decided if it makes practical sense to have both the Leica 11874 and the LLL '11873.' But, I am a gear hoarder, so logic is out the window. It certainly looks cool on a camera body. And the images are nice, to boot.
_jim_ wrote:
I still haven't decided if it makes practical sense to have both the Leica 11874 and the LLL '11873.' But, I am a gear hoarder, so logic is out the window. It certainly looks cool on a camera body. And the images are nice, to boot.
It’s indeed a series with the LLL? I hadn’t seen yet samples of it with that kind of flares, it’s nice. I begin to be tempted by that lens.
Great photos as always, I’m compelled to go fetch a film now.
