Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
p.33 #1Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
CA location? You mean where you can see chromatic aberration in the shot? 😬
Sep 14, 2026 at 12:38 PM
p.33 #2Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
gammarART wrote:
CA location? You mean where you can see chromatic aberration in the shot? 😬
Well it did arrive quite noticeably decentered, so back it goes. I just don't have the patience for this stuff any longer. Looks cool, though.
CA location? You mean where you can see chromatic aberration in the shot? 😬
Well it did arrive quite noticeably decentered, so back it goes. I just don't have the patience for this stuff any longer. Looks cool, though.
Sep 18, 2026 at 04:56 PM
p.33 #3Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
^I deem thee... Cylon '78!
Sep 18, 2026 at 05:59 PM
p.33 #4Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
highdesertmesa wrote:
Well it did arrive quite noticeably decentered, so back it goes. I just don't have the patience for this stuff any longer. Looks cool, though.
Shame to hear that, hopefully they make it right. I wonder what their defect rate is. There might be a negative feedback bias, but it seems like there are a not-insignificant amount of lenses with issues. I'm wondering if they are prioritizing scaling quantity and quality control is suffering as a result. It is frustrating to see this occurring on one of their more limited batches of lenses.
gammarART wrote
CA location? You mean where you can see chromatic aberration in the shot? 😬Shame to hear that, hopefully they make it right. I wonder what their defect rate is. There might be a negative feedback bias, but it seems like there are a not-insignificant amount of lenses with issues. I'm wondering if they are prioritizing scaling quantity and quality control is suffering as a result. It is frustrating to see this occurring on one of their more limited batches of lenses.
Sep 18, 2026 at 07:28 PM
p.33 #5Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Anybody here who tested the LLL against the pre FLE 11874? Would be interesting to see a direct comparison 🙌
Sep 19, 2026 at 01:43 AM
p.33 #6Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
endergemini wrote:
Well it did arrive quite noticeably decentered, so back it goes. I just don't have the patience for this stuff any longer. Looks cool, though.Shame to hear that, hopefully they make it right. I wonder what their defect rate is. There might be a negative feedback bias, but it seems like there are a not-insignificant amount of lenses with issues. I'm wondering if they are prioritizing scaling quantity and quality control is suffering as a result. It is frustrating to see this occurring on one of their more limited batches of lenses.
I have a new Leica M Adapter L arriving Monday just to make sure my current adapter isn’t the issue (Hawks Factory macro). My other LLL lenses don’t have any centering issues on my current adapter, but it’s worth a try. David with LLL responded to my support email and has offered to swap mine with another new one he has access to, which was a really nice gesture. I’ll take him up on the offer if I still see a centering issue using the new adapter.
highdesertmesa wrote
gammarART wrote
CA location? You mean where you can see chromatic aberration in the shot? 😬I have a new Leica M Adapter L arriving Monday just to make sure my current adapter isn’t the issue (Hawks Factory macro). My other LLL lenses don’t have any centering issues on my current adapter, but it’s worth a try. David with LLL responded to my support email and has offered to swap mine with another new one he has access to, which was a really nice gesture. I’ll take him up on the offer if I still see a centering issue using the new adapter.
Sep 19, 2026 at 03:50 AM
p.33 #7Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
highdesertmesa wrote:
Well it did arrive quite noticeably decentered, so back it goes. I just don't have the patience for this stuff any longer. Looks cool, though.
I’ve purchased this lens 3 (Ti copy) times and had issues with all three. I give up. I preordered the 35 APO, I’ll give it one chance, don’t want to play this game anymore. Out of all Leica lenses I’ve had, I’ve had one single lens that had to go back to get corrected, ironically my most expensive - the 35 Nocti
gammarART wrote
CA location? You mean where you can see chromatic aberration in the shot? 😬I’ve purchased this lens 3 (Ti copy) times and had issues with all three. I give up. I preordered the 35 APO, I’ll give it one chance, don’t want to play this game anymore. Out of all Leica lenses I’ve had, I’ve had one single lens that had to go back to get corrected, ironically my most expensive - the 35 Nocti
Sep 19, 2026 at 05:42 AM
p.33 #8Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
rsolti13 wrote:
Well it did arrive quite noticeably decentered, so back it goes. I just don't have the patience for this stuff any longer. Looks cool, though.I’ve purchased this lens 3 (Ti copy) times and had issues with all three. I give up. I preordered the 35 APO, I’ll give it one chance, don’t want to play this game anymore. Out of all Leica lenses I’ve had, I’ve had one single lens that had to go back to get corrected, ironically my most expensive - the 35 Nocti
Getting M lens element alignment perfect for scrutiny on high res sensors must not be easy. I've had a new Leica 35 APO M and a new 50 Cron M both arrive decentered. The Cron also didn't have rangefinder patch alignment at the infinity hard stop. Don't get me started on Voigtlander issues right out of the box. At least I'm using the SL3 for M lenses now and don't have to worry about rangefinder focus alignment. It's the M system in general I'm running out of patience with – too many planets have to align for everything to work right. I hope Leica continues the M EV1 lineup because I can't go back to the mechanical rangefinder as much as I enjoy using it.
highdesertmesa wrote
gammarART wrote
CA location? You mean where you can see chromatic aberration in the shot? 😬Getting M lens element alignment perfect for scrutiny on high res sensors must not be easy. I've had a new Leica 35 APO M and a new 50 Cron M both arrive decentered. The Cron also didn't have rangefinder patch alignment at the infinity hard stop. Don't get me started on Voigtlander issues right out of the box. At least I'm using the SL3 for M lenses now and don't have to worry about rangefinder focus alignment. It's the M system in general I'm running out of patience with – too many planets have to align for everything to work right. I hope Leica continues the M EV1 lineup because I can't go back to the mechanical rangefinder as much as I enjoy using it.
Sep 19, 2026 at 08:17 AM
p.33 #9Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip side, Cosina has improved drastically in production tolerance and QC, though results still depend on optical complexity, as complex designs are simply harder to keep perfectly aligned. Light Lens Lab has been surprisingly solid regarding element centering in my testing, though rangefinder alignment was hit or miss initially, a detail they seem to have improved recently as well.
High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.
High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.
Sep 19, 2026 at 08:58 AM
p.33 #10Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip...Show more →
Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip...Show more →
Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
Sep 19, 2026 at 09:09 AM
|
p.33 #11Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
highdesertmesa wrote:
High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Fred Miranda wrote
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip side, Cosina has improved drastically in production tolerance and QC, though results still depend on optical complexity, as complex designs are simply harder to keep perfectly aligned. Light Lens Lab has been surprisingly solid regarding element centering in my testing, though rangefinder alignment was hit or miss initially, a detail they seem to have improved recently as well.High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Sep 19, 2026 at 09:41 AM
p.33 #12Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Mine is showing:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip side, Cosina has improved drastically in production tolerance and QC, though results still depend on optical complexity, as complex designs are simply harder to keep perfectly aligned. Light Lens Lab has been surprisingly solid regarding element centering in my testing, though rangefinder alignment was hit or miss initially, a detail they seem to have improved recently as well.High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Mine is showing:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
Sep 19, 2026 at 09:55 AM
p.33 #13Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
highdesertmesa wrote:
High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/Mine is showing:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
That looks like swing (left-to-right) with a slight tilt (I would ignore the small tilt and focus on the swing which is more noticeable). Keep in mind that no lens is perfectly centered....if we shot on 500MP sensors, every lens would show some tilt or swing!
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip side, Cosina has improved drastically in production tolerance and QC, though results still depend on optical complexity, as complex designs are simply harder to keep perfectly aligned. Light Lens Lab has been surprisingly solid regarding element centering in my testing, though rangefinder alignment was hit or miss initially, a detail they seem to have improved recently as well.High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
That looks like swing (left-to-right) with a slight tilt (I would ignore the small tilt and focus on the swing which is more noticeable). Keep in mind that no lens is perfectly centered....if we shot on 500MP sensors, every lens would show some tilt or swing!
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.
Sep 19, 2026 at 10:55 AM
p.33 #14Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/Mine is showing:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)That looks like swing (left-to-right) with a slight tilt (I would ignore the small tilt and focus on the swing which is more noticeable). Keep in mind that no lens is perfectly centered....if we shot on 500MP sensors, every lens would show some tilt or swing!
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's...Show more →
Thanks, Fred. I tried flipping the camera yesterday, and the issue stays with the same corner when the camera is inverted. It's enough of an issue that at infinity (scene with houses at 1/2 mile and mountains at 5-30 miles), scenes cannot be shot with this lens unless stopped down to f/11.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip side, Cosina has improved drastically in production tolerance and QC, though results still depend on optical complexity, as complex designs are simply harder to keep perfectly aligned. Light Lens Lab has been surprisingly solid regarding element centering in my testing, though rangefinder alignment was hit or miss initially, a detail they seem to have improved recently as well.High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's...Show more →
Thanks, Fred. I tried flipping the camera yesterday, and the issue stays with the same corner when the camera is inverted. It's enough of an issue that at infinity (scene with houses at 1/2 mile and mountains at 5-30 miles), scenes cannot be shot with this lens unless stopped down to f/11.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.
Sep 19, 2026 at 11:07 AM
p.33 #15Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
highdesertmesa wrote:
High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/Mine is showing:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)That looks like swing (left-to-right) with a slight tilt (I would ignore the small tilt and focus on the swing which is more noticeable). Keep in mind that no lens is perfectly centered....if we shot on 500MP sensors, every lens would show some tilt or swing!
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.Thanks, Fred. I tried flipping the camera yesterday, and the issue stays with the same corner when the camera is inverted. It's enough of an issue that at infinity (scene with houses at 1/2 mile and mountains at 5-30 miles), scenes cannot be shot with this lens unless stopped down to f/11.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or...Show more →
If you flip it and the issue stays in the exact same spot, it's definitely not the lens. People rarely suspect the camera mount itself, but my last Sony actually had a tilted mount...I sent it in to Sony and they fixed it. If you can, try testing the lens natively on a Leica M body without an adapter to isolate it further.
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
I test for centered optics with a high degree of scrutiny. It used to be that you got what you paid for, as stricter production tolerances cost money, meaning expensive lenses produced more consistent and optimal copies. While that is still generally true, recent years have shown that even Leica, despite making some of the most expensive M mount lenses, sometimes delivers decentered copies. This is something I have experienced myself and seen reported by many others online, especially with their latest design, even though their overall tolerance and quality control is still among the best. On the flip side, Cosina has improved drastically in production tolerance and QC, though results still depend on optical complexity, as complex designs are simply harder to keep perfectly aligned. Light Lens Lab has been surprisingly solid regarding element centering in my testing, though rangefinder alignment was hit or miss initially, a detail they seem to have improved recently as well.High resolution 60MP sensors make it much harder to hide minor flaws like lens element tilt, swing, or rangefinder misalignment. The increased resolution amplifies these physical issues, making them far more noticeable in real world testing.
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or...Show more →
If you flip it and the issue stays in the exact same spot, it's definitely not the lens. People rarely suspect the camera mount itself, but my last Sony actually had a tilted mount...I sent it in to Sony and they fixed it. If you can, try testing the lens natively on a Leica M body without an adapter to isolate it further.
Sep 19, 2026 at 11:20 AM
p.33 #16Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/Mine is showing:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)That looks like swing (left-to-right) with a slight tilt (I would ignore the small tilt and focus on the swing which is more noticeable). Keep in mind that no lens is perfectly centered....if we shot on 500MP sensors, every lens would show some tilt or swing!
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.Thanks, Fred. I tried flipping the camera yesterday, and the issue stays with the same corner when the camera is inverted. It's enough of an issue that at infinity (scene with houses at 1/2 mile and mountains at 5-30 miles), scenes cannot be shot with this lens unless stopped down to f/11.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.If you flip it and the issue stays in the exact same spot, it's definitely not the lens. People rarely suspect the camera mount itself, but my last Sony actually had a tilted mount...I sent it in to Sony and they fixed it. If you can, try testing the lens natively on a Leica M body without an adapter to isolate it further.
I mean the issue stays in the same part of the frame, in other words it follows the same corner of the lens.
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Before this, I’ve only had one other LLL lens that was decentered, which was an 8 Element. But I’ve had three other copies of the 8 Element that were correctly centered. A decentered LLL does seem to be rare, which is why I want to verify it’s not my adapter at fault before exchanging my AA.I did reach out to Don at DAG about fixing the centering issue with my LLL AA, but he didn’t think he could get it aligned due to the aspherical elements, which require specialized equipment.
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.
I mean the issue stays in the same part of the frame, in other words it follows the same corner of the lens.
Sep 19, 2026 at 11:23 AM
p.33 #17Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
highdesertmesa wrote:
Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/Mine is showing:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)That looks like swing (left-to-right) with a slight tilt (I would ignore the small tilt and focus on the swing which is more noticeable). Keep in mind that no lens is perfectly centered....if we shot on 500MP sensors, every lens would show some tilt or swing!
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.Thanks, Fred. I tried flipping the camera yesterday, and the issue stays with the same corner when the camera is inverted. It's enough of an issue that at infinity (scene with houses at 1/2 mile and mountains at 5-30 miles), scenes cannot be shot with this lens unless stopped down to f/11.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.If you flip it and the issue stays in the exact same spot, it's definitely not the lens. People rarely suspect the camera mount itself, but my last Sony actually had a tilted mount...I sent it in to Sony and they fixed it. If you can, try testing the lens natively on a Leica M body without an adapter to isolate it further.I mean the issue stays in the same part of the frame, in other words it follows the same corner of the lens.
I see...I thought you meant the softness stayed in the same spot on the image frame, but you meant it moved with the lens. That definitely changes things!
Here's a quick test you can try: remove the lens mount and cut a curved strip of standard-duty household aluminum foil to fit under one quadrant (or half) of the mount. Make sure it's laying completely flat on the soft side. It's very fast to test. If it actually makes that side softer, just move the foil to the opposite side instead. It can be hard to tell which side needs the correction without trial and error, but this is a quick 5-minute fix.
For reference, here are the foil thicknesses:
Standard-Duty: 0.016 mm (16 microns)
Heavy-Duty: 0.024 mm (24 microns)
Extra Heavy-Duty: 0.033 mm (33 microns)
If you want to do this right, you should buy circular shims that go on the count screws as the article describes but aluminum foil works the same way.
BTW, that polish titanium lens on your SL3 Safari looks gorgeous. I'm sure LLL would love to use your picture.
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
If it's just a mount centering issue which is the most common, it's easier to fix using shims. However, if the internal elements are misaligned, that's much rarer and unfortunately not something we can fix ourselves.Here is a great tutorial that walks through the process...it's actually how I learned to do it.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1662397/
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.
I see...I thought you meant the softness stayed in the same spot on the image frame, but you meant it moved with the lens. That definitely changes things!
Here's a quick test you can try: remove the lens mount and cut a curved strip of standard-duty household aluminum foil to fit under one quadrant (or half) of the mount. Make sure it's laying completely flat on the soft side. It's very fast to test. If it actually makes that side softer, just move the foil to the opposite side instead. It can be hard to tell which side needs the correction without trial and error, but this is a quick 5-minute fix.
For reference, here are the foil thicknesses:
Standard-Duty: 0.016 mm (16 microns)
Heavy-Duty: 0.024 mm (24 microns)
Extra Heavy-Duty: 0.033 mm (33 microns)
If you want to do this right, you should buy circular shims that go on the count screws as the article describes but aluminum foil works the same way.
BTW, that polish titanium lens on your SL3 Safari looks gorgeous. I'm sure LLL would love to use your picture.
Sep 19, 2026 at 11:41 AM
p.33 #18Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)That looks like swing (left-to-right) with a slight tilt (I would ignore the small tilt and focus on the swing which is more noticeable). Keep in mind that no lens is perfectly centered....if we shot on 500MP sensors, every lens would show some tilt or swing!
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.Thanks, Fred. I tried flipping the camera yesterday, and the issue stays with the same corner when the camera is inverted. It's enough of an issue that at infinity (scene with houses at 1/2 mile and mountains at 5-30 miles), scenes cannot be shot with this lens unless stopped down to f/11.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.If you flip it and the issue stays in the exact same spot, it's definitely not the lens. People rarely suspect the camera mount itself, but my last Sony actually had a tilted mount...I sent it in to Sony and they fixed it. If you can, try testing the lens natively on a Leica M body without an adapter to isolate it further.I mean the issue stays in the same part of the frame, in other words it follows the same corner of the lens.I see...I thought you meant the softness stayed in the same spot on the image frame, but you meant it moved with the lens. That definitely changes things!
Here's a quick test you can try: remove the lens mount and cut a curved strip of standard-duty household aluminum foil to fit under one quadrant (or half) of the mount. Make sure it's laying completely flat on the soft side. It's very fast to test. If it actually makes that side softer, just move the foil to the opposite side instead. It can be hard to tell which side needs the...Show more →
Well, I don't want to take the lens mount off or mess with it since David has offered to swap it out with another new one. I'll first try the new adapter that arrives Monday. If that gives the same results, I'll exchange it. But that's great info for fixing a lens that's out of warranty.
It is a great looking lens, for sure. Interesting the engraving still says X/200 since they originally targeted 200 but only came out with 60 that were sellable.
(edited to add better photo)
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
highdesertmesa wrote
Mine is showing:Top left = softest
Bottom left = soft but less soft than top left
Top right = expected sharpness
Bottom right = very sharp
Would that be a tilted element (provided my adapter is not the issue)? I’ve not checked mid frame.
(Reading through that thread you linked to now)
To narrow it down, try the 180 degree rotation test: shoot the exact same scene with the camera upside down.
If the softness stays top-left, it's your camera body or sensor alignment. Yes, sometimes the camera mount itself is actually the issue, rather than the lens or adapter.
If it moves to the bottom-right, it's the lens or adapter. And honestly, it is pretty rare to find a perfectly centered adapter. Even expensive brands usually show some degree of tilt or swing, even if it's ever so small.
If it's definitely the lens, you could likely fix this by adding shims to the left side of the lens mount (the same side as the softness). I would recommend reading through the article to get a feel for the process and the exact thickness needed. For a 35mm FL lens, a change as small as 0.02mm makes a noticeable difference.
Could be the adapter or camera, but all my other LLL lenses and two Mandler lenses are more or less perfectly equal in all four corners when shot wide open at f/2 and infinity. Maybe the double-aspherical design of the AA is making any issues with the adapter or camera more evident, IDK.
Here's a quick test you can try: remove the lens mount and cut a curved strip of standard-duty household aluminum foil to fit under one quadrant (or half) of the mount. Make sure it's laying completely flat on the soft side. It's very fast to test. If it actually makes that side softer, just move the foil to the opposite side instead. It can be hard to tell which side needs the...Show more →
Well, I don't want to take the lens mount off or mess with it since David has offered to swap it out with another new one. I'll first try the new adapter that arrives Monday. If that gives the same results, I'll exchange it. But that's great info for fixing a lens that's out of warranty.
It is a great looking lens, for sure. Interesting the engraving still says X/200 since they originally targeted 200 but only came out with 60 that were sellable.
(edited to add better photo)
Sep 19, 2026 at 12:21 PM
p.33 #19Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Had a crazy deal on the shop app that gave me 145 off and it stacked with the FREDMIRANDA code so I got a new copy of the black aluminum for 1272 shipped.
Sep 20, 2026 at 09:15 AM
p.33 #20Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" Review
Bastians Review is online: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-light-lens-lab-35mm-1-4-aspherical-11873/
Sep 20, 2026 at 10:29 AM