Not just the packaging, but the effort and care put into the presentation experience puts Voigtlander and others to shame. The fact they took the time to write, design, and include a welcome letter with bullet points about what to expect from the lens, what their thought process was behind the design of the lens, tips, etc. is really nice.
Lens seems to be well-centered as were my two copies of their KOB replica. Rendering at f/1.4 at close distances reminds me of the LLL 35 f/1.4 double aspherical replica.
So far so good. Putting the silver chrome brass version on my to-buy list.
Update, holy cow, veiling flare with this lens is insane. I've written to Mandler to ask if any internal anti-reflective coatings inside the lens were left off some of the copies. Never seen veiling flare this bad with a lens before.
Ooofff. That's rough. Maybe they'll blame it on your SL body. It's an M lens after all :-D
On a serious note tho, how easily and often was this happening? And was your hood up or down?
highdesertmesa wrote:
Update, holy cow, veiling flare with this lens is insane. I've written to Mandler to ask if any internal anti-reflective coatings inside the lens were left off some of the copies. Never seen veiling flare this bad with a lens before.
dumplinknet wrote:
Ooofff. That's rough. Maybe they'll blame it on your SL body. It's an M lens after all :-D
On a serious note tho, how easily and often was this happening? And was your hood up or down?
Sun coming straight into the lens. Depending on the angle, it can just ruin a small corner or half the image. Hood is very short and only blocks the flare when the sun angle is just starting to hit the lens.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Sun coming straight into the lens. Depending on the angle, it can just ruin a small corner or half the image. Hood is very short and only blocks the flare when the sun angle is just starting to hit the lens.
Do you have a way to test it against the Leica original?
stgrove wrote:
Do you have a way to test it against the Leica original?
I don't, but I did compare it to the Mandler 35 below. I tried with/without the UV filter. Tried two different adapters just in case (Leica and Hawk's Factory). Extending the lens hood does nothing of course with the sun directly entering the lens. The flare from the 35 is expected and usable as an artistic style. The flare from the 50 is veiling and image-ruining.
raizans wrote:
What f-stops were the flare test shots taken at?
Both wide open. Stopping down the 50 to f/2 makes little difference. Even at f/5.6, it's still veiling flare that makes the image too low contrast to use. Stopping down just changes the amount of veiling flare, but it doesn't change the nature of it. The 35 retains enough contrast all the way to f/2 to be usable provided you see the expected ghosting artifacts as artistic elements in the shot.
Following the discussion with interest. Regarding flare, I own the Leica 50/1.4 vII, and it definitely seems to be better flare resistant than what is shown here with the Mandler. I will post a photo later which was taken recently against the sun, and the Leica lens exhibits some flaring but much more controlled. It actually comes with a nice glimpse of orange cast from the orange front lens coat of this lens.
retrofocus wrote:
Following the discussion with interest. Regarding flare, I own the Leica 50/1.4 vII, and it definitely seems to be better flare resistant than what is shown here with the Mandler. I will post a photo later which was taken recently against the sun, and the Leica lens exhibits some flaring but much more controlled. It actually comes with a nice glimpse of orange cast from the orange front lens coat of this lens.
From first shots off the rear LCD I sent to Mandler, they said they think that's outside what they expect from the lens (message quoted below). They had further questions, which I hopefully answered, plus I sent the actual photos above taken this morning. Will report back what they say. The only other lens I've seen with veiling flare this bad when shooting into the sun was the $79 TTArtisan 50 f/2 I used on my Nikon Zf. The Voigtlander Vintage Line 35 f/1.5 I once had also exhibited this kind of veiling flare when shot wide open into the sun, but it was about half as strong as what I see with the Mander.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The interior surfaces of the lens are treated with matte black anodizing, and reflective surfaces are coated with Japanese GT-7 matte-black ink. The lens uses a purple-and-gold coating inspired by a signature style of the 1990s. Its flare resistance may be slightly lower than that of some modern green coatings, while this coating contributes to a richer color rendition.
However, the severe veiling flare shown in your example would not be expected under ordinary conditions; it would generally require strong light entering from an extreme side angle. We’d like to investigate further. Were you using the lens directly on an M-mount camera, or through an adapter? If you used an adapter, could you let us know its make and model?
Could you also share the light source and its position relative to the lens, along with the shooting angle? This will help our team reproduce the conditions and test the lens. If our testing confirms that your lens is exhibiting an abnormal issue, we can arrange a replacement for you.
Thank you for helping us look into this. We’ll do our best to resolve it.
highdesertmesa wrote:
From first shots off the rear LCD I sent to Mandler, they said they think that's outside what they expect from the lens (message quoted below). They had further questions, which I hopefully answered, plus I sent the actual photos above taken this morning. Will report back what they say. The only other lens I've seen with veiling flare this bad when shooting into the sun was the $79 TTArtisan 50 f/2 I used on my Nikon Zf. The Voigtlander Vintage Line 35 f/1.5 I once had also exhibited this kind of veiling flare when shot wide open into the sun, but it was about half as strong as what I see with the Mander.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The interior surfaces of the lens are treated with matte black anodizing, and reflective surfaces are coated with Japanese GT-7 matte-black ink. The lens uses a purple-and-gold coating inspired by a signature style of the 1990s. Its flare resistance may be slightly lower than that of some modern green coatings, while this coating contributes to a richer color rendition.
However, the severe veiling flare shown in your example would not be expected under ordinary conditions; it would generally require strong light entering from an extreme side angle. We’d like to investigate further. Were you using the lens directly on an M-mount camera, or through an adapter? If you used an adapter, could you let us know its make and model?
Could you also share the light source and its position relative to the lens, along with the shooting angle? This will help our team reproduce the conditions and test the lens. If our testing confirms that your lens is exhibiting an abnormal issue, we can arrange a replacement for you.
Thank you for helping us look into this. We’ll do our best to resolve it....Show more →
Thanks for sharing this. It's good that they responded quickly and seem to be determined to find more about this issue. Possible that your lens copy is a one off, but to me it seems more that the low contrast in your above flare photo with the 50/1.4 derives from internal reflections between interior glass elements of the lens. In this case nothing can be done here.
retrofocus wrote:
Thanks for sharing this. It's good that they responded quickly and seem to be determined to find more about this issue. Possible that your lens copy is a one off, but to me it seems more that the low contrast in your above flare photo with the 50/1.4 derives from internal reflections between interior glass elements of the lens. In this case nothing can be done here.
I've had some pretty hyper-reflective glass before with my DAG CLAed Leica 35 f/1.4 pre-ASPH v2, and it had ghosting flare artifacts (rings, red shapes, etc.) everywhere, but veiling flare was milder. The Mandler 50 veiling flare I'm seeing seems more like the internal matte-black anti-reflective coating they mention was either left off or was only partially applied. LLL just had that happen with the production of their 35 APO and had to recall some units.
Here's a few wide open with my favorite test model who luckily likes to sit on the couch right next to the sliding glass door so I could see what the flares are like. Taken with live view on my M10, and yes I did go blow out the hair on the sensor once I saw these lol.
edit:these are sooc jpg downloaded via leica fotos app
