_jim_ wrote:
Thanks Fred for the comparison photos. I gotta say, I was really surprised to see the 100% crops of the LLL out-of-focus specular highlights. At screen resolution, the texture looks like flannel to me - even the edges of the 'blur discs' are a little fuzzy, but zoomed in, what a surprise to see two sets of offset concentric rings - like rain drops on a pond. Interesting!
Also, the rainbow flare and veiling flare are a feature...and a bug...depending on the situation. My 50 Summilux ASPH 11891 makes crazy rainbow flares (so, at least the LLL is doing something Leica is known to do as well).
On the topic of flare...one of my favorite attributes of my 11874 is how poorly it contains highlights...leading to a beautiful bloom around bright light sources. It's quite unique amongst all of my 35mm lenses. I'll be very excited to see how it compares to my LLL 11873.
Overall, the resolving power of the LLL seem good enough and your comparisons show that it draws quite differently from the FLE (and my gut says that it will be different enough from my 11874 to warrant keeping them all...but who am I kidding, I never sell anything).
The 11874 has always been one of my most favored 35mm lens, especially the way it draws, handles highlights, flair characteristics and even when necessary, put into service for landscapes that require higher resolving power (when used stopped down). It's strength in my opinion is for environmental portraits and close to mid distance use. It has just the right amount of SA, especially when shot wide open, to give images some character without overdoing or overpowering the image. Of course every lens has their own set of unique properties that some may favor, where they accentuate certain optical properties and/or performance. Lenses like the steel rim, especially used wide open for its "look" or alternatively the more technically proficient modern lenses such as the FLE or Zeiss ZM 35mm f1.4. Each has its place in use or favored over another.
From all I have seen so far, the LLL seems a worthy successor to the 11874, especially without the 11874's considerable focus shift. Whether one of these lenses has other optical desirable advatages over the other, will require actual head to head testing in my opinion. Personally for myself, although the FLE, LLL, AA and Pre FLE are closely related and can be considered in the same closely related family of lenses based on optical properties, I'd almost further separate them into groups...the 11874 along with the LLL, then separately the FLE along with the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 (aside from their size/weight differences) and that leave the AA and my conjecture is it might be categorized along with the LLL and Pre FLE but that's just a guess at this point.
Loved examining everyone's images and perspectives, especially with regards to the LLL lens! Thanks to Fred and all others who contributed!
_jim_ wrote:
Thanks Fred for the comparison photos. I gotta say, I was really surprised to see the 100% crops of the LLL out-of-focus specular highlights. At screen resolution, the texture looks like flannel to me - even the edges of the 'blur discs' are a little fuzzy, but zoomed in, what a surprise to see two sets of offset concentric rings - like rain drops on a pond. Interesting!
Also, the rainbow flare and veiling flare are a feature...and a bug...depending on the situation. My 50 Summilux ASPH 11891 makes crazy rainbow flares (so, at least the LLL is doing something Leica is known to do as well).
On the topic of flare...one of my favorite attributes of my 11874 is how poorly it contains highlights...leading to a beautiful bloom around bright light sources. It's quite unique amongst all of my 35mm lenses. I'll be very excited to see how it compares to my LLL 11873.
Overall, the resolving power of the LLL seem good enough and your comparisons show that it draws quite differently from the FLE (and my gut says that it will be different enough from my 11874 to warrant keeping them all...but who am I kidding, I never sell anything).
The 11874 has always been one of my most favored 35mm lens, especially the way it draws, handles highlights, flair characteristics and even when necessary, put into service for landscapes that require higher resolving power (when used stopped down). It's strength in my opinion is for environmental portraits and close to mid distance use. It has just the right amount of SA, especially when shot wide open, to give images some character without overdoing or overpowering the image. Of course every lens has their own set of unique properties that some may favor, where they accentuate certain optical properties and/or performance. Lenses like the steel rim, especially used wide open for its "look" or alternatively the more technically proficient modern lenses such as the FLE or Zeiss ZM 35mm f1.4. Each has its place in use or favored over another.
From all I have seen so far, the LLL seems a worthy successor to the 11874, especially without the 11874's considerable focus shift. Whether one of these lenses has other optical desirable advatages over the other, will require actual head to head testing in my opinion. Personally for myself, although the FLE, LLL, AA and Pre FLE are closely related and can be considered in the same closely related family of lenses based on optical properties, I'd almost further separate them into groups...the 11874 along with the LLL, then separately the FLE along with the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 (aside from their size/weight differences) and that leave the AA and my conjecture is it might be categorized along with the LLL and Pre FLE but that's just a guess at this point.
Loved examining everyone's images and presepctivea, especially with regards to the LLL! Thanks to Fred and all others who contributed.
_jim_ wrote:
Thanks Fred for the comparison photos. I gotta say, I was really surprised to see the 100% crops of the LLL out-of-focus specular highlights. At screen resolution, the texture looks like flannel to me - even the edges of the 'blur discs' are a little fuzzy, but zoomed in, what a surprise to see two sets of offset concentric rings - like rain drops on a pond. Interesting!
Also, the rainbow flare and veiling flare are a feature...and a bug...depending on the situation. My 50 Summilux ASPH 11891 makes crazy rainbow flares (so, at least the LLL is doing something Leica is known to do as well).
On the topic of flare...one of my favorite attributes of my 11874 is how poorly it contains highlights...leading to a beautiful bloom around bright light sources. It's quite unique amongst all of my 35mm lenses. I'll be very excited to see how it compares to my LLL 11873.
Overall, the resolving power of the LLL seem good enough and your comparisons show that it draws quite differently from the FLE (and my gut says that it will be different enough from my 11874 to warrant keeping them all...but who am I kidding, I never sell anything).
The 11874 has always been one of my most favored 35mm lens, especially the way it draws, handles highlights, flair characteristics and even when necessary, put into service for landscapes that require higher resolving power (when used stopped down). It's strength in my opinion is for environmental portraits and close to mid distance use. It has just the right amount of SA, especially when shot wide open, to give images some character without overdoing or overpowering the image. Of course every lens has their own set of unique properties that some may favor, where they accentuate certain optical properties and/or performance. Lenses like the steel rim, especially used wide open for its "look" or alternatively the more technically proficient modern lens such as the FLE or Zeiss ZM 35mm f1.4. Each has its place in use or favored over another.
From all I have seen so far, the LLL seems a worthy successor to the 11874, especially without the 11874's considerable focus shift. Whether one of these lenses has other optical desirable advatages over the other, will require actual head to head testing in my opinion. Personally for myself, although the FLE, LLL, AA and Pre FLE are closely related and can be considered in the same closely related family of lenses based on optical properties, I'd almost further separate them into groups...the 11874 along with the LLL, then separately the FLE along with the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 (aside from their size/weight differences) and that leave the AA and my conjecture is it might be categorized along with the LLL and Pre FLE but that's just a guess at this point.
Loved examining everyone's images and presepctivea, especially with regards to the LLL! Thanks to Fred and all others who contributed.
_jim_ wrote:
Thanks Fred for the comparison photos. I gotta say, I was really surprised to see the 100% crops of the LLL out-of-focus specular highlights. At screen resolution, the texture looks like flannel to me - even the edges of the 'blur discs' are a little fuzzy, but zoomed in, what a surprise to see two sets of offset concentric rings - like rain drops on a pond. Interesting!
Also, the rainbow flare and veiling flare are a feature...and a bug...depending on the situation. My 50 Summilux ASPH 11891 makes crazy rainbow flares (so, at least the LLL is doing something Leica is known to do as well).
On the topic of flare...one of my favorite attributes of my 11874 is how poorly it contains highlights...leading to a beautiful bloom around bright light sources. It's quite unique amongst all of my 35mm lenses. I'll be very excited to see how it compares to my LLL 11873.
Overall, the resolving power of the LLL seem good enough and your comparisons show that it draws quite differently from the FLE (and my gut says that it will be different enough from my 11874 to warrant keeping them all...but who am I kidding, I never sell anything).
The 11874 has always been one of most favored 35mm lens, especially the way it draws, handles highlights, flair characteristics and even when necessary, put into service for landscapes that require higher resolving power (when used stopped down). It's strength in my opinion is for environmental portraits and close to mid distance use. It has just the right amount of SA, especially when shot wide open, to give images some character without overdoing or overpowering the image. Of course every lens has their own set of unique properties that some may favor, where they accentuate certain optical properties and/or performance. Lenses like the steel rim, especially used wide open for its "look" or alternatively the more technically proficient modern lens such as the FLE or Zeiss ZM 35mm f1.4. Each has its place in use or favored over another.
From all I have seen so far, the LLL seems a worthy successor to the 11874, especially without the 11874's considerable focus shift. Whether one of these lenses has other optical desirable advatages over the other, will require actual head to head testing in my opinion. Personally for myself, although the FLE, LLL, AA and Pre FLE are closely related and can be considered in the same closely related family of lenses based on optical properties, I'd almost further separate them into groups...the 11874 along with the LLL, then separately the FLE along with the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 (aside from their size/weight differences) and that leave the AA and my conjecture is it might be categorized along with the LLL and Pre FLE but that's just a guess at this point.
Loved examining everyone's images and presepctivea, especially with regards to the LLL! Thanks to Fred and all others who contributed.
