RomanMF wrote:
The rendering of the Mandler 50 F/1.4 seems pedestrian, especially in comparison to the 35 F/2. Granted those lenses are going for different things, but I think leaning into that quirkiness would've been the way to go. Basing their whole brand around another man's designs limits their lens choices, but I'm sure there are quirkier lenses they could have chosen for their second product.
There is something very interesting.
When Mandler announced the 35mm 7E, a flood of Leica 35mm 7E replicas suddenly hit the market within a year: Mr. Ding, Peace, Artizlab, Artralab. Mandler wasn't even the first.
When Mandler announced the 50mm, a flood of Leica 50mm f/1.4 replicas suddenly hit the market within a year: Peace, Artizlab. Mandler wasn't even the first, either.
Mandler is just a rehousing brand sourcing off-the-shelf optics from a major OEM. They don't even list a physical street address on their manuals or packaging. They can only choose from the limited catalog that their upstream supplier offers.
DIXI 50 wrote: RomanMF wroteThe rendering of the Mandler 50 F/1.4 seems pedestrian, especially in comparison to the 35 F/2. Granted those lenses are going for different things, but I think leaning into that quirkiness would've been the way to go. Basing their whole brand around another man's designs limits their lens choices, but I'm sure there are quirkier lenses they could have chosen for their second product.There is something very interesting.
When Mandler announced the 35mm 7E, a flood of Leica 35mm 7E replicas suddenly hit the market within a year: Mr. Ding, Peace, Artizlab, Artralab. Mandler wasn't even the first.
When Mandler announced the 50mm, a flood of Leica 50mm f/1.4 replicas suddenly hit the market within a year: Peace, Artizlab. Mandler wasn't even the first, either.
Mandler is just a rehousing brand sourcing off-the-shelf optics from a major OEM. They don't even list a physical street address on their manuals or packaging. They can only choose from the limited catalog that their upstream supplier offers.
If B&H or Adorama carries any of these Chinese brand lenses, that at least gives you a real safety net—you can return them if the quality doesn’t hold up. Both retailers have a relatively high bar for the products they stock and a strong track record with customer care and returns. That alone makes them a more trustworthy channel than buying directly from some random seller or overseas marketplace.
What’s frustrating is how these discussions play out online. In most photography forums, the moment you voice a negative opinion about these lenses, you get hit with backlash from people who already bought them. They’re heavily invested (both financially and emotionally) in defending their purchase, so any criticism is treated as an attack. It quickly turns into a pile-on rather than an honest conversation about actual optical performance, build quality, or long-term reliability.
DIXI 50 wrote: RomanMF wroteThe rendering of the Mandler 50 F/1.4 seems pedestrian, especially in comparison to the 35 F/2. Granted those lenses are going for different things, but I think leaning into that quirkiness would've been the way to go. Basing their whole brand around another man's designs limits their lens choices, but I'm sure there are quirkier lenses they could have chosen for their second product.There is something very interesting.
When Mandler announced the 35mm 7E, a flood of Leica 35mm 7E replicas suddenly hit the market within a year: Mr. Ding, Peace, Artizlab, Artralab. Mandler wasn't even the first.
When Mandler announced the 50mm, a flood of Leica 50mm f/1.4 replicas suddenly hit the market within a year: Peace, Artizlab. Mandler wasn't even the first, either.
Mandler is just a rehousing brand sourcing off-the-shelf optics from a major OEM. They don't even list a physical street address on their manuals or packaging. They can only choose from the limited catalog that their upstream supplier offers.
Your point is well taken and I and others have noticed this trend too but I certainly don't know the back story. One correction though. The Peace lens has never made or released a 35mm 7E lens (KOB).
philip_pj wrote:
Thanks very much for the detailed reply, it is much appreciated, as are the images. The build of my copy is better than a near-new Leica 50/2 R (MIG) I have. I am gathering information about users' reactions to this one, as well as researching the background of the master designer.
I also own several Leica lenses, and while I think the build quality of the Mandler 50mm is very good, I wouldn't quite put it on the same level as Leica.
Dan Chang wrote:
If B&H or Adorama carries any of these Chinese brand lenses, that at least gives you a real safety net—you can return them if the quality doesn’t hold up. Both retailers have a relatively high bar for the products they stock and a strong track record with customer care and returns. That alone makes them a more trustworthy channel than buying directly from some random seller or overseas marketplace.
What’s frustrating is how these discussions play out online. In most photography forums, the moment you voice a negative opinion about these lenses, you get hit with backlash from people who already bought them. They’re heavily invested (both financially and emotionally) in defending their purchase, so any criticism is treated as an attack. It quickly turns into a pile-on rather than an honest conversation about actual optical performance, build quality, or long-term reliability. ...Show more →
I agree with you, Dan. That's actually one of the reasons I decided to try these Chinese-made lenses myself rather than relying solely on online reviews. Quite a few YouTube reviewers receive sponsored products or have relationships with these manufacturers, and I sometimes feel that the drawbacks don't get nearly as much attention as the positives.
I've tried quite a few Chinese-made lenses from Mandler, TTArtisan, Light Lens Lab, and Thypoch. Based on my personal experience, I'd generally rank their build quality and overall fit and finish as follows:
For build quality and control : Leica >= Voigtländer >= LLL (good copy) > Thypoch / Mandler > TTArtisan
Of course, this is just my personal impression based on the lenses I've owned or handled.
When it comes to third-party lenses, I still think Voigtländer has the most consistent quality control, particularly compared to the newer Chinese manufacturers. That said, if you get a good copy from LLL, the value for money can be outstanding.
Thypoch also makes some very interesting lenses. I particularly like their rendering and bokeh, which often have a smooth, vintage character. Unfortunately, the biggest issue for me has been light leaks during long exposures. I've owned both the 21mm f/1.4 and 28mm f/1.4, and both exhibited the same problem. That's ultimately why I've decided to move away from Thypoch. Otherwise, I think the 28mm f/1.4 and 75mm f/1.4 are very attractive options, especially with the current Black Friday discounts.
So far, my best experience among these Chinese-made lenses has been with the LLL 35mm f/1.4 (11873 replica). The build quality, handling, and overall experience have been excellent. I've also ordered the LLL 35mm f/2 APO, but I'm still waiting for it to arrive.
It's interesting to see how much these newer manufacturers have improved over the past few years. While they're not quite at Leica's level in terms of consistency and refinement, some of their lenses offer a lot of character and excellent value for the money.
BTW, I do want to give Mandler credit for their customer support. When I reported the lens-locking issue with my first copy of the 50mm f/1.4, they acknowledged the problem and sent me a replacement that now locks securely onto my M11. I really appreciate that they took responsibility and made things right.
Unfortunately, my experience with Thypoch has been quite different. I've contacted them about the light-leak issues, but their responses have been slow, and I still haven't received a satisfactory resolution.
To me, how a manufacturer handles problems after the sale is just as important as the quality of the lens itself, especially when it comes to these newer brands.
I think it comes down to individual lenses and possibly haptic preferences. The FM archives are replete with reports of build issues with Leica M lenses. I have a very old Leica Elmar 135mm which is built incredibly well, many of them are still around in good shape because they were hard to focus on M cameras. The R lenses might have got short shrift from the assembly - who knows?
The essence of the project is well-stated by Mandler: 'With modern Chinese craftsmanship, we bring classic optical designs back to life. We are not placing vintage lenses in a museum. We are allowing them to awaken once again in the hands of artisans, under the light of today.'
Another interesting titbit is that Mandler have re-engineered old glass characteristics with lead-free glass, and that is not easy to do well: 'Because they are not trying to make a 1:1 replica, they do not source or chemically recreate vintage lead-based glass formulas. Instead, they utilize modern optical glass formulations processed through modern engineering.'
The irony here is that the people with their Leica E46 lenses used as the source for the M50/1.4 are using lead and arsenic glass lenses: 'The vintage Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 Pre-ASPH E46 (Version 3) almost certainly contains lead glass in some of its elements. Produced between 1992 and 2004, this lens kept the exact 7-element, 5-group optical formula designed by Walter Mandler in 1961—an era when lead oxide and arsenic were standard ingredients for achieving high refractive index glass.' Myself, I prefer lead glass but understand why they took this path, and well done. 👍