Honestly I was looking forward to testing this one since they announced it for real a few months ago so I ordered one in black aluminum the second it was available. When I finished my order I went back to the item page and saw it was already sold out in black. It couldn't have been longer than 2-3 minutes.
I tried to order at one second into the 10am time frame and it was sold out at one second. What a PITA to have this happen. They can keep it at this point after having us wait for nothing.
'simply cannot replicate the original perfectly because of materials'
Now, AIs are only as good as their training base, but this below appears to be true. If so, it indicates they do indeed have the choice - if they want an exact copy. And the exact dimensions can be measured to a very high level of exactitude.
Q: Allowing destructive means, how hard is it to determine the exact glass composition of a vintage lens a non-OEM lens maker may wish to replicate in a remake of their own?
"To expedite reverse engineering, a lab will typically use a combination of the following techniques to map both the bulk glass and the optical coatings. Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) is the gold standard for elemental analysis.
A technician crushes a small fragment of the lens element and dissolves it in a powerful acid (often a mix of hydrofluoric and nitric acid). This liquid is turned into a fine mist and sprayed into a high-temperature plasma torch (about 10,000°C), which breaks the glass down into individual ions.
A mass spectrometer then measures those ions. It provides a nearly 100% exact recipe of the glass chemistry, identifying the exact percentages of silica, heavy metals (like lead or lanthanum), and rare-earth dopants."
"By destructively vaporizing or dissolving a small sample, non-OEM manufacturers get the exact chemical formula. They can then match this signature to modern glass catalogs (like Schott or Ohara) or manufacture a custom batch of glass with an identical refractive index and Abbe number to replicate that distinct "vintage look."
"A separate process (SIMS) is used to dig into the lens - layer by layer. It is incredibly useful for reverse-engineering anti-reflective coatings. It tells the engineers exactly how many layers of materials (like magnesium fluoride or titanium dioxide) were baked onto the lens and their exact thicknesses."
philip_pj wrote:
'simply cannot replicate the original perfectly because of materials'
Now, AIs are only as good as their training base, but this below appears to be true. If so, it indicates they do indeed have the choice - if they want an exact copy. And the exact dimensions can be measured to a very high level of exactitude.
Q: Allowing destructive means, how hard is it to determine the exact glass composition of a vintage lens a non-OEM lens maker may wish to replicate in a remake of their own?
"To expedite reverse engineering, a lab will typically use a combination of the following techniques to map both the bulk glass and the optical coatings. Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) is the gold standard for elemental analysis.
A technician crushes a small fragment of the lens element and dissolves it in a powerful acid (often a mix of hydrofluoric and nitric acid). This liquid is turned into a fine mist and sprayed into a high-temperature plasma torch (about 10,000°C), which breaks the glass down into individual ions.
A mass spectrometer then measures those ions. It provides a nearly 100% exact recipe of the glass chemistry, identifying the exact percentages of silica, heavy metals (like lead or lanthanum), and rare-earth dopants."
"By destructively vaporizing or dissolving a small sample, non-OEM manufacturers get the exact chemical formula. They can then match this signature to modern glass catalogs (like Schott or Ohara) or manufacture a custom batch of glass with an identical refractive index and Abbe number to replicate that distinct "vintage look."
"A separate process (SIMS) is used to dig into the lens - layer by layer. It is incredibly useful for reverse-engineering anti-reflective coatings. It tells the engineers exactly how many layers of materials (like magnesium fluoride or titanium dioxide) were baked onto the lens and their exact thicknesses." ...Show more →
I don't think there's any problem figuring out what the materials were made of. But for replicating vintage lenses, environmental regulations often don't allow for the original materials to be used. Modern materials have to be substituted, and in the case of the rare earth materials that replace lead and thorium in lens elements, performance is increased and character changes. Chinese lens makers can probably still use the older materials, but I don't think Leica can.
specLegacy wrote:
Looks like at least one scalper got to this lens and is trying to sell it on eBay
Hahah just went to check and see what they were trying to charge and that is hilarious. Especially when they’ve already said there should be a restock before the 1st. I would assume anyone who knows enough to know about the lens can see the statement on the website.
'I don't think there's any problem figuring out what the materials were made of.'
I was surprised at the level of sophistication labs can employ, so passed it on.
'environmental regulations often don't allow for the original materials to be used.'
Sadly, it's the case in the EU. Zeiss and Schott fought it very hard, even into the teens decades.
It may help explain the lukewarm reception to the 2025 Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 (pre-ASPH) Reissue. I imagine they used the same lens design, but the v2/v3 block charts are hard to find. The v3 contained lead apparently, despite it being sold up to the 2004 Karbe era lens.
'Because the physical geometry and refractive properties of the formula were completely untouched, the (1992 V3) lens still relied heavily on traditional lead oxide and arsenic glass compositions.'
ByChrisJones wrote:
Hahah just went to check and see what they were trying to charge and that is hilarious. Especially when they’ve already said there should be a restock before the 1st. I would assume anyone who knows enough to know about the lens can see the statement on the website.
The eBay opportunists are still stuck out there trying to sell the Mandler 35mm for crazy prices while the lens is currently in stock with Mandler! I guess they just leave the listings up hoping the lens goes out of stock again.
cary.z wrote:
Are people ordering this to shoot alongside 50 Luxes? Or to augment something in the toolkit?
I have both a pre-ASPH V2 and an ASPH 50 Lux. My plan is to use it as a cheaper alternative when I’m not rich enough to be able to afford losing or damaging the original.
BTW, I love the Lux V2. It was my first Leica lens, and it’s still one of my favorites. I don’t think this is a replacement, but rather a much cheaper substitute for situations where you probably would have left the original at home anyway.
Curious about the 50cm near focusing too, even if it’s only useful on digital M cameras.
