The 50mm f/2 Elcan by Light Lens Lab is probably one of my favorite lenses on M-mount. My 50mm prior was the zeiss 50mm f/2, which is a great lens. Then, LLL came out, and I gave them a try. It's truly a joy to use and renders wonerfully.
The regular SPII version/housing has even more glow at f/2 since it's not multicoated like the rigid version. Either way, they are both beautiful in b&w at f/2 when focused at mid to long distance (at closer distances, the glow is reduced or absent). Not many 50mm M lenses have such distinctive glow wide open while still having decent sharpness across the frame at infinity.
I'm usually a big fan of the 6 element double gauss design... not here though. An old Minolta 58/1.4 mounted on a GFX will smash this in terms of bokeh. Or just on an FF camera. There are plenty of 6-7 element Biotar/Planar style lenses that are much more dreamy and quite cheap, the Contax 50/1.4T* comes to mind. If it has to be a rangefinder lens, the original LTM Canon 50/1.2 and 1.4 were bangers and don't break the bank!
nice video, very interesting lenses the same design doesn’t produce the same image look. The biggest difference is the quality of the glass. For me is the 2.0 50 very interesting
Nice review of a couple of nice lenses. I try to snag good copies of the vintage lenses. The Panchro equivalent I have is the Cook Amotal 2" f/2.0 with similar characteristics. The "Cooke Look", that wonderful glow at the open f-stops. The vintage lenses and their reproductions are nice on digital cameras, mellowing.
I pre-ordered the noctilux re-issue (good thing too, since the prices went up before they wound up shipping). It showed up just in time for my sister's wedding. I do love it, I think vintage re-issue wise though I'm a bigger fan of the 35mm steel rim. Eventually I'll budget for a SP2, since in sample images I do love the way it renders.
I've had an LLB Elcan for some time now. It's a beautiful lens! Well built, almost on par with a Summicron in centre sharpness wide open but with character in the corners and out of focus areas. Once stopped down the corners look good too. LLB are doing something really unique, I am curious to see what they come up with next.
Last november I bought a Voightlander 35mm f1.4 Nokton Classic for e mount. Gotta say, I love vintage remakes. Might have to check these lenses out next.
I have been thinking of buying the Pancro II, but like you said it's a specialized lens, and I am not sure if I can justify buying it. It looks fun though !
LLL lenses are very popular among leica users here in Korea. 50s are also nice but 35mm f2 8 element lens(copy of 35mm summicron 8 element) is I think their best offering. All of their lenses are replicates of leica's old, rare, characterful and expensive lenses. Also LLL lenses have a lot of character and charm, the look they are producing is obviously not 100% matching the original. Not a bad thing, we just accept that as LLL lens' own character and enjoy that. Finally, if you are thinking "these lenses are pointless because they are expensive than Cosina lenses", then you are not the target demographic of them. Cosina lenses are nice in its own way(I also have and enjoy voigt. 21mm f1.4 asph. these days), but generally build quality of LLL is much superior and the images coming out of it are nothing like that from Cosina. In my opinion, Cosina M mount lenses are sharp, clean, well built, well priced but they are just like any modern lens from any brand-which means characterless to me. That's not a bad thing, clean and sharp lenses have their own use and purpose, but they cannot replace old(or high quality replica of it in this case) characterful lenses.
My Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 is anything but clean and sharp at any aperture wider than f2.8 and only really sharp in the centre from f2.8. In fact it is quite soft at f1.2. Of course it looks clean and sharp once you stop down to f8-f16 and get sharp corners. I find Voigtlander APO lenses are sharper wide open and have less character for my liking.
Strangely I'm equal parts love/hate these new copy lenses that are popping up. Personally I've been sticking to "period correct" glass albeit Canon stuff a lot of the time, I think the Canon LTM glass is still an affordable alternative to Leica lenses. It's certainly starting to get up there in price but my 35mm F2.8 Canon LTM is no slouch on my M3. Personally I'd rather run some vintage Canon glass than a modern repro. And it usually comes down to something totally stupid like I can't stand the font TT Artisan use on the name ring haha.
I'm not seeing the value in the LLL lenses for myself. Too niche and too expensive for being so niche. Why would I spend THAT kind of money on something that is not Leica? It's a heck more expensive than Voigtlaender or Zeiss by Cosina and a lot of their lenses offer plenty of "character" as well - and Cosina is not trying to be a copy cat of anything else.
Aside from one lens in their lineup, LLL’s whole schtick is they make replicas of rare / expensive lenses. For example their 50mm f2 Elcan is $800 new but a real Leica 50mm f2 Elcan is $30k due to its rarity
@@josephstitt137 Someone buying the Leica Elcan is not buying it for its optical character, they're buying it for its rarity value. Obviously, someone buying the LLL replica is not buying it for rarity. But buying the LLL for the optical character at the prices they sell for makes no sense for me personally - the Cosina lineup provides MUCH better value in that department. It's just not a value proposition aimed at myself.
It's a great idea, a great concept. However, I wouldn't buy them, there is no resale value for these lens. Just wait for a nice looking vintage Leica, if you're patient enough you'll find one.
Honestly, I would just get a TT Artisan or 7Artisans lens at this point. Maybe not the perfect shape ans everything, but selling a fully manual lens for that amount of money is laughable at best.
And modern expensive lenses are sharp wide open, clinical and predictable. Each type of lens has its pluses and minuses but the look of any lens is always subjective and there's no right or wrong.
Yeah, clinical sounds like a pejorative in this context. I think Sony GM, Canon L, etc. primes have gorgeous rendering. The focus fall off is so smooth. The bokeh is buttery and non-distracting. Yes, I like some of those old Russian lenses that produce that swirly bokeh and have more subdued colors, but while the bokeh is interesting to look at, in a more objective sense, it distracts from the subject of the photograph. You are right, though. To each their own.
@@Daniel_Zalman Clinical is just a technical term to describe lenses that have many corrections to produce much cleaner images which pretty much describes all of the premium lenses. Of course people can still love the look these lenses produce. Some love the smooth bokeh and others think it makes the lenses look less interesting. Character lenses with plenty of flaws that give them their character are loved by some and loathed by others too.
Yes, but “Cheap and affordable” are always relative concepts in the Leica🔴 world. I think this company looked at the prices on ebay and priced their stuff accordingly. We’ll see if it works.
@@williamlasl If someone wants to poop over any of these lenses or lens manufacturers, that's of course what the comments section is for. It's also for disagreeing with the original comment.
@@UnconventionalReasoning I was joking about how the main use of comments on social media and internet in general is to complain. But of course I forgot about the other main use: to argue.
Awesome business model - let's make really crap, really expensive lenses! These won't appeal to collectors or photographers, what's the point, seriously?
The TT and & Artisans are "copies" only in the respect of focal length and f-stop, the actual optical designs are typically different that the originals theirs were based on. Most if the LLL lenses are true reproductions...same optical design, even sources rare glass types and in the case of the 1966 "Noctilucent", image closer to the original design than even Leica's slightly modified re-release.
@@anthonymiller8979 Actually I am very want 35mm Lil lens which is very small and good outlooks. Now I consider Voigtlander ultron 35mm F2 and Lll 35mm.
I can’t be the only one who heard “twenty two ninety nine” as $22.99 and thought it was great value 😂😂😂
still a bit pricey, looking at the results...
I've been using a lot of vintage lenses recently, love that they are reproducing some of these old optics
ohhhh I really want to try that 1966
I'm glad that there are some cheaper options for the m-mount shooters out there. Thanks Matt
The 50mm f/2 Elcan by Light Lens Lab is probably one of my favorite lenses on M-mount.
My 50mm prior was the zeiss 50mm f/2, which is a great lens. Then, LLL came out, and I gave them a try. It's truly a joy to use and renders wonerfully.
Love what you said about DOF and overuse of wide open shooting, which should be a novelty. Well said!
My vintage lens I use with the Leica MD 262, Summicron 50mm Rigid, is great for a filmic rendering on a digital camera...!
The regular SPII version/housing has even more glow at f/2 since it's not multicoated like the rigid version. Either way, they are both beautiful in b&w at f/2 when focused at mid to long distance (at closer distances, the glow is reduced or absent). Not many 50mm M lenses have such distinctive glow wide open while still having decent sharpness across the frame at infinity.
I'm excited for their Apo -summicron M 35mm f2! And their 11873 remake with brass body. Those are coming out in 2024!
I'm usually a big fan of the 6 element double gauss design... not here though. An old Minolta 58/1.4 mounted on a GFX will smash this in terms of bokeh. Or just on an FF camera. There are plenty of 6-7 element Biotar/Planar style lenses that are much more dreamy and quite cheap, the Contax 50/1.4T* comes to mind. If it has to be a rangefinder lens, the original LTM Canon 50/1.2 and 1.4 were bangers and don't break the bank!
Even though it's just a test, it's always good to see your photos
Great thing what Light Lens lab has done. I was too young and poor in 1966 to afford even a Yashica rangefinder.
nice video, very interesting lenses
the same design doesn’t produce the same image look. The biggest difference is the quality of the glass. For me is the 2.0 50 very interesting
Nice review of a couple of nice lenses. I try to snag good copies of the vintage lenses. The Panchro equivalent I have is the Cook Amotal 2" f/2.0 with similar characteristics. The "Cooke Look", that wonderful glow at the open f-stops. The vintage lenses and their reproductions are nice on digital cameras, mellowing.
been following LLL for years now, I looking to get a 50mm f2 Elcan and the 35mm 8 element for my M5
I pre-ordered the noctilux re-issue (good thing too, since the prices went up before they wound up shipping). It showed up just in time for my sister's wedding. I do love it, I think vintage re-issue wise though I'm a bigger fan of the 35mm steel rim. Eventually I'll budget for a SP2, since in sample images I do love the way it renders.
I've had an LLB Elcan for some time now. It's a beautiful lens! Well built, almost on par with a Summicron in centre sharpness wide open but with character in the corners and out of focus areas. Once stopped down the corners look good too. LLB are doing something really unique, I am curious to see what they come up with next.
Last november I bought a Voightlander 35mm f1.4 Nokton Classic for e mount. Gotta say, I love vintage remakes. Might have to check these lenses out next.
my video on the 35/2 8E is dropping pretty soon too. Super fun little lenses
I have been thinking of buying the Pancro II, but like you said it's a specialized lens, and I am not sure if I can justify buying it. It looks fun though !
LLL lenses are very popular among leica users here in Korea. 50s are also nice but 35mm f2 8 element lens(copy of 35mm summicron 8 element) is I think their best offering.
All of their lenses are replicates of leica's old, rare, characterful and expensive lenses. Also LLL lenses have a lot of character and charm, the look they are producing is obviously not 100% matching the original. Not a bad thing, we just accept that as LLL lens' own character and enjoy that.
Finally, if you are thinking "these lenses are pointless because they are expensive than Cosina lenses", then you are not the target demographic of them. Cosina lenses are nice in its own way(I also have and enjoy voigt. 21mm f1.4 asph. these days), but generally build quality of LLL is much superior and the images coming out of it are nothing like that from Cosina. In my opinion, Cosina M mount lenses are sharp, clean, well built, well priced but they are just like any modern lens from any brand-which means characterless to me. That's not a bad thing, clean and sharp lenses have their own use and purpose, but they cannot replace old(or high quality replica of it in this case) characterful lenses.
My Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 is anything but clean and sharp at any aperture wider than f2.8 and only really sharp in the centre from f2.8. In fact it is quite soft at f1.2. Of course it looks clean and sharp once you stop down to f8-f16 and get sharp corners. I find Voigtlander APO lenses are sharper wide open and have less character for my liking.
Do they have better coatings than the vintage ones? The speed pancro seems fantastic!
Im gonna hang on to my Zeiss Classics forever.
Because of your last video I watched, I am now the proud owner of the TTArtisn 11mm fisheye.
I need a new medium format rangefinder to go into production
That mirror photo at 4:35 is nice 😍
That handrail!
great review, i need to check these lenses out
Really enjoying the 50 Elcan I have from LLL - I don’t think the f1.2 is really my style either
I have their Pancro II and its awesome
Strangely I'm equal parts love/hate these new copy lenses that are popping up. Personally I've been sticking to "period correct" glass albeit Canon stuff a lot of the time, I think the Canon LTM glass is still an affordable alternative to Leica lenses. It's certainly starting to get up there in price but my 35mm F2.8 Canon LTM is no slouch on my M3.
Personally I'd rather run some vintage Canon glass than a modern repro. And it usually comes down to something totally stupid like I can't stand the font TT Artisan use on the name ring haha.
I'm not seeing the value in the LLL lenses for myself. Too niche and too expensive for being so niche. Why would I spend THAT kind of money on something that is not Leica? It's a heck more expensive than Voigtlaender or Zeiss by Cosina and a lot of their lenses offer plenty of "character" as well - and Cosina is not trying to be a copy cat of anything else.
Aside from one lens in their lineup, LLL’s whole schtick is they make replicas of rare / expensive lenses. For example their 50mm f2 Elcan is $800 new but a real Leica 50mm f2 Elcan is $30k due to its rarity
@@josephstitt137 Someone buying the Leica Elcan is not buying it for its optical character, they're buying it for its rarity value. Obviously, someone buying the LLL replica is not buying it for rarity. But buying the LLL for the optical character at the prices they sell for makes no sense for me personally - the Cosina lineup provides MUCH better value in that department. It's just not a value proposition aimed at myself.
I would like to see FD mount 14mm f/2.8 lens remade for a better price. I don't think it will ever happen though.
The problem is that it looks the same but simply doesn't perform the same and unlike Leica glasses doesn't retain the value over time.
It's a great idea, a great concept. However, I wouldn't buy them, there is no resale value for these lens. Just wait for a nice looking vintage Leica, if you're patient enough you'll find one.
Honestly, I would just get a TT Artisan or 7Artisans lens at this point. Maybe not the perfect shape ans everything, but selling a fully manual lens for that amount of money is laughable at best.
Character = Soft Wide-Open with aberrations
And modern expensive lenses are sharp wide open, clinical and predictable. Each type of lens has its pluses and minuses but the look of any lens is always subjective and there's no right or wrong.
@@creative_cozmic What do you mean by clinical?
@@Daniel_Zalman Clinical means well corrected, very sharp. Think of the premium lenses from the major brands.
Yeah, clinical sounds like a pejorative in this context. I think Sony GM, Canon L, etc. primes have gorgeous rendering. The focus fall off is so smooth. The bokeh is buttery and non-distracting. Yes, I like some of those old Russian lenses that produce that swirly bokeh and have more subdued colors, but while the bokeh is interesting to look at, in a more objective sense, it distracts from the subject of the photograph. You are right, though. To each their own.
@@Daniel_Zalman Clinical is just a technical term to describe lenses that have many corrections to produce much cleaner images which pretty much describes all of the premium lenses. Of course people can still love the look these lenses produce. Some love the smooth bokeh and others think it makes the lenses look less interesting. Character lenses with plenty of flaws that give them their character are loved by some and loathed by others too.
$2299 isn't cheap or affordable for a lens like this from a company I never heard of before today. That's wild.
Yes, but “Cheap and affordable” are always relative concepts in the Leica🔴 world. I think this company looked at the prices on ebay and priced their stuff accordingly. We’ll see if it works.
IMO Voigtlander and Zeiss still poop all over the non Leica market, including Chinese makers like LLL.
The intended look is different, so nothing is pooping all over anything else.
@@UnconventionalReasoningWhat is the comments section for if not pooping all over things!? 💩
@@williamlasl If someone wants to poop over any of these lenses or lens manufacturers, that's of course what the comments section is for. It's also for disagreeing with the original comment.
@@UnconventionalReasoning
I was joking about how the main use of comments on social media and internet in general is to complain. But of course I forgot about the other main use: to argue.
@@williamlasl you’re wrong. Gosh I’m so sick of these types of comments
Gorgeous but wayyy outside my budget. Glad someone io making the effort to introduce 'new' stuff though that is a bit more affordable.
The Speed Panchro II reproduction is around $900 USD, compared to the other lens which seems to be over $2k.
for how bad these lenses are they should be half the price *cough* OVER HYPED *cough*
Awesome business model - let's make really crap, really expensive lenses! These won't appeal to collectors or photographers, what's the point, seriously?
Why Light lens lab products is more expensive than 7 Artisan and TTArtisan? Both is copy Leica lenses .
The TT and & Artisans are "copies" only in the respect of focal length and f-stop, the actual optical designs are typically different that the originals theirs were based on. Most if the LLL lenses are true reproductions...same optical design, even sources rare glass types and in the case of the 1966 "Noctilucent", image closer to the original design than even Leica's slightly modified re-release.
@@anthonymiller8979 Actually I am very want 35mm Lil lens which is very small and good outlooks. Now I consider Voigtlander ultron 35mm F2 and Lll 35mm.
@@Fujifilm2021 I have the LLL 35mm 8-element lens and it is one of my favorites. The Voigtlander Ultron is also well regarded.
@@anthonymiller8979 Lll 35mm is more expensive?
@@Fujifilm2021 With patience used ones can be found around $750 or so. New I would guess they are more than an Ultron
Meaningless. Vintage lenses are valuable because they are vintage, there is nothing good about their optical qualities to reproduce them.