Photar
Well-known
That's what I did, stating my personal opinion. Did not want to offend you.
The Mandler 35mm f2
- Thread starter Archiver
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 42
- Views 3K
Freakscene
Obscure member
I’m not offended at all.
Out to Lunch
Veteran
At least within the EU, not an issue of copyright protection. Trademark protection could come into play but only if at some point in time the name Mandler was registered as a trademark.
Duofold RF
Well-known
Asked Grok who is not a lawyer
Yes, a Chinese manufacturer using “Mandler” as a brand name and “Summicron” on the packaging for their lenses would likely constitute trademark infringement (not copyright infringement, which applies to creative works like designs or writings rather than brand identifiers). Here’s a breakdown of why, based on the context of the Mandler 35mm f/2 lens and similar replicas:
Trademark Issues with “Summicron”
• Leica’s Ownership: “Summicron” is a registered trademark of Leica Camera AG, specifically for their f/2 lenses (a naming convention dating back to the 1950s). It’s protected in major jurisdictions, including the EU, US, and China, to prevent consumer confusion. Using it on non-Leica products implies affiliation or endorsement, which dilutes Leica’s brand and misleads buyers into thinking it’s an official or compatible Leica product.
• Infringement Risk: Third-party manufacturers cannot use Leica’s trademarks on their goods without permission. While copying the optical formula (e.g., the 7-element design of the 1979 Summicron 35mm f/2) isn’t infringement—lens designs aren’t copyrightable in most cases and are often reverse-engineered legally—the branding crosses the line. Packaging with “Summicron” could lead to cease-and-desist letters, lawsuits, or seizures, as seen in past Leica disputes over knockoffs (e.g., fake Leica-branded accessories).
• Real-World Examples: Chinese replicas like the Polar Solaron-M 35mm f/2 or Light Lens Lab’s versions avoid “Summicron” entirely, calling them “inspired by” or “replicas of the 7-element 35mm f/2” to skirt issues. If “Summicron” appears on the box, it’s a red flag for infringement.
Trademark Issues with “Mandler”
• Walter Mandler’s Legacy: Dr. Walter Mandler (1922–2005) was Leica’s legendary optical designer, credited with over 45 iconic lenses, including multiple Summicrons. His name isn’t a Leica trademark per se, but using it as a brand (e.g., “Mandler Lenses”) exploits his association with Leica, potentially violating right of publicity laws (if his estate controls his name) or causing “passing off” (falsely suggesting Leica endorsement).
• Ethical and Legal Concerns: Reviewers and photographers have called this “cheeky” or “appropriation,” noting it feels like hijacking Mandler’s reputation without permission from his family or Leica. No evidence exists of licensing, and Leica has a history of protecting its heritage (e.g., suing over “Leica-look” fakes). In China, where the Mandler lens originates, enforcement is laxer, but international sales could trigger disputes.
• Company Background: The Mandler brand emerged in 2025 as a rebrand of Polar Optics (after quality complaints), selling the same Summicron replica with a new logo. This opacity raises further red flags for IP issues.
Broader Context and Advice
• No Active Lawsuits (Yet): As of November 2025, there’s no public record of Leica suing over the Mandler lens specifically, but the product’s low profile (no official website, limited US launch) suggests it’s flying under the radar. Leica often targets blatant copies aggressively.
• Buyer Beware: These lenses (~$600–$1,000) appeal to Leica M users seeking affordable “vintage” optics, but quality varies (e.g., inconsistent coatings, build). If you’re considering one, verify the packaging—avoid anything with “Summicron” to steer clear of fakes or legal headaches.
• Alternatives: Opt for established third-parties like 7Artisans 35mm f/2 (~$300, no branding issues) or Voigtländer Nokton, which homage designs without infringing.
In short, this isn’t just ethically dubious—it’s legally risky for the manufacturer and confusing for consumers. Leica’s trademarks are fiercely guarded to maintain their premium status. If you’re the manufacturer or a reseller, consult an IP lawyer; if you’re a buyer, stick to reputable sources.
Yes, a Chinese manufacturer using “Mandler” as a brand name and “Summicron” on the packaging for their lenses would likely constitute trademark infringement (not copyright infringement, which applies to creative works like designs or writings rather than brand identifiers). Here’s a breakdown of why, based on the context of the Mandler 35mm f/2 lens and similar replicas:
Trademark Issues with “Summicron”
• Leica’s Ownership: “Summicron” is a registered trademark of Leica Camera AG, specifically for their f/2 lenses (a naming convention dating back to the 1950s). It’s protected in major jurisdictions, including the EU, US, and China, to prevent consumer confusion. Using it on non-Leica products implies affiliation or endorsement, which dilutes Leica’s brand and misleads buyers into thinking it’s an official or compatible Leica product.
• Infringement Risk: Third-party manufacturers cannot use Leica’s trademarks on their goods without permission. While copying the optical formula (e.g., the 7-element design of the 1979 Summicron 35mm f/2) isn’t infringement—lens designs aren’t copyrightable in most cases and are often reverse-engineered legally—the branding crosses the line. Packaging with “Summicron” could lead to cease-and-desist letters, lawsuits, or seizures, as seen in past Leica disputes over knockoffs (e.g., fake Leica-branded accessories).
• Real-World Examples: Chinese replicas like the Polar Solaron-M 35mm f/2 or Light Lens Lab’s versions avoid “Summicron” entirely, calling them “inspired by” or “replicas of the 7-element 35mm f/2” to skirt issues. If “Summicron” appears on the box, it’s a red flag for infringement.
Trademark Issues with “Mandler”
• Walter Mandler’s Legacy: Dr. Walter Mandler (1922–2005) was Leica’s legendary optical designer, credited with over 45 iconic lenses, including multiple Summicrons. His name isn’t a Leica trademark per se, but using it as a brand (e.g., “Mandler Lenses”) exploits his association with Leica, potentially violating right of publicity laws (if his estate controls his name) or causing “passing off” (falsely suggesting Leica endorsement).
• Ethical and Legal Concerns: Reviewers and photographers have called this “cheeky” or “appropriation,” noting it feels like hijacking Mandler’s reputation without permission from his family or Leica. No evidence exists of licensing, and Leica has a history of protecting its heritage (e.g., suing over “Leica-look” fakes). In China, where the Mandler lens originates, enforcement is laxer, but international sales could trigger disputes.
• Company Background: The Mandler brand emerged in 2025 as a rebrand of Polar Optics (after quality complaints), selling the same Summicron replica with a new logo. This opacity raises further red flags for IP issues.
Broader Context and Advice
• No Active Lawsuits (Yet): As of November 2025, there’s no public record of Leica suing over the Mandler lens specifically, but the product’s low profile (no official website, limited US launch) suggests it’s flying under the radar. Leica often targets blatant copies aggressively.
• Buyer Beware: These lenses (~$600–$1,000) appeal to Leica M users seeking affordable “vintage” optics, but quality varies (e.g., inconsistent coatings, build). If you’re considering one, verify the packaging—avoid anything with “Summicron” to steer clear of fakes or legal headaches.
• Alternatives: Opt for established third-parties like 7Artisans 35mm f/2 (~$300, no branding issues) or Voigtländer Nokton, which homage designs without infringing.
In short, this isn’t just ethically dubious—it’s legally risky for the manufacturer and confusing for consumers. Leica’s trademarks are fiercely guarded to maintain their premium status. If you’re the manufacturer or a reseller, consult an IP lawyer; if you’re a buyer, stick to reputable sources.
Last edited:
Duofold RF
Well-known
Then Grok give this:
Fake, knockoff, replica, or wannabe products have a market because people buy them for self-satisfaction.
Most buyers don’t want to fool experts—they want to fool themselves (and casual observers) just enough to feel the fantasy. The replica isn’t about deception; it’s emotional compensation for what they can’t (yet) afford.
Quote from a replica buyer (Reddit, 2025):
“I know it’s not real Leica glass. But when I mount it on my M10, I feel like I belong in that world. That’s worth $600 to me.”
Fake, knockoff, replica, or wannabe products have a market because people buy them for self-satisfaction.
Most buyers don’t want to fool experts—they want to fool themselves (and casual observers) just enough to feel the fantasy. The replica isn’t about deception; it’s emotional compensation for what they can’t (yet) afford.
Quote from a replica buyer (Reddit, 2025):
“I know it’s not real Leica glass. But when I mount it on my M10, I feel like I belong in that world. That’s worth $600 to me.”
Duofold RF
Well-known
Per LLL info, they are using moulded methods different from the original. You got a knockoff, not even a true replica.
Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 "Aspherical" in Production
Hello Everyone, After two years of continuous development and refinement, we are pleased to announce that production of the Light Lens Lab 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" has officially begun. The lens will be available for order in the last quarter of 2025. A prototype of the 35mm f/1.4...
lightlenslab.com
Last edited:
WoodallP
Pragmatist Barnack lover
An interesting development here, on a FB post in the Leica III user group. Clear suggestions of an LTM version but no clear confirmation other than a picture. Does anyone know more also does anyone know the VF on the Barnack?
TenEleven
Well-known
No one seemed to have a problem with Skyllaney calling their f2 Sonnar revival lens and tribute to Ludwig Bertele "The Bertele", I guess if China does it it's bad?
It appears to be this finder (site in Chinese): https://www.lightmate.pro/en/sys-pd/4.html
It says made from glass and aluminium, adjustable cold shoe. 5 glass elements in 4 optical groups. (Most metal CV finders everyone likes are 4 elements). It seems to be a Chinese spin on the 28/35 Cosina mini-finder which was very popular. Covers 50, 35 and 28. I dunno if 28 would have framelines or if it's just the whole view. the website does not say.
Edit: In one of the images it looks like there are 2 framelines. So as I suspected. You get 50/35 framelines and then the whole view is 28
Edit 2: The weird nubs on the side are so that it can mate with the light-meter. So you don't need a cold-shoe doubler to do both.
Last edited:
Freakscene
Obscure member
They said they were going to make it in LTM and there have been photos and prototypes seen in the field. That’s all anyone knows I think.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
If I hadn't just found a mint (and unhazed!) CV 35mm f/2.4 Color Skopar I'd almost be interested.
I'm still a little wary of the non-LLL Chinese rangefinder lenses that are popping up; a lot of them seem very fly-by-night at the moment. Hopefully things settle down and we get a couple of new Voigtlander-style brands out of this weird period.
I'm still a little wary of the non-LLL Chinese rangefinder lenses that are popping up; a lot of them seem very fly-by-night at the moment. Hopefully things settle down and we get a couple of new Voigtlander-style brands out of this weird period.
Duofold RF
Well-known
Both lenses borrow from classic optical blueprints, but they do so in very different ways. Skyllaney updates the traditional 6/3 Sonnar design for modern M-mount use—adding multi-coating, floating elements, and closer minimum focus—while staying on firm legal ground. The Mandler, by contrast, is essentially a near–1:1 optical clone of the 7/5 Summicron Type IV.
The real divergence appears in branding and presentation. Skyllaney keeps things clean: the lens is engraved simply “Bertele 50mm f/2,” honoring Ludwig Bertele without invoking the “Sonnar” trademark owned by Zeiss. There are no barrel engravings, packaging cues, or marketing materials implying an official Zeiss connection. It is explicitly framed as “a remake of the 1934 formula first designed by Dr. Bertele,” emphasizing the designer’s legacy rather than the brand.
The Mandler lens, on the other hand, carries the engraving “Mandler 35mm f/2,” which is perfectly acceptable as a designer tribute—Walter Mandler’s name is not trademarked. But resale listings and promotional materials frequently market it as the “Mandler 35mm f/2 ‘Summi-Cron-M’ 7-Element,” and the box design mirrors this hybrid phrasing. The effect is a blurred line between homage and appropriation.
Chinese manufacturers such as 7Artisans and Thypoch—brands carried by B&H—produce well-made and reliably manufactured lenses. LLL has chosen a different path, targeting higher profit margins by positioning its products as “Leica replicas.” These hand-assembled lenses, often lacking a production license, quality inspection certificate, or identifiable factory information, can vary widely in build and optical consistency.
Duofold RF
Well-known
These rings were made/offered by the guy who also offer CNC Leica MP top plate @splitimageview
Attachments
WoodallP
Pragmatist Barnack lover
Yes the video of someone swapping the front ring is highly dubious.
Duofold RF
Well-known
These guys are fooling themselves by wearing fake Rolexes just to show off to their neighbors.
Maybe Leica should tell LLL: ‘Do whatever you want, but stop relating Leica name to your products. LLL did gain higher profits margin by connect their products with Leica.
TenEleven
Well-known
LLL has absolutely made innovations. They made the 8element 35mm summicron into a collapsible LTM lens.
They also improved the optical design so that there is less coma while still retaining the signature look of what I'll just call "gentle sharpness" vs the crunchy look of later lenses.
It's one of my daily drivers, especially on Canon LTM bodies. I also quite like their take on the ELCAN which I also have in LTM, altough I do not quite like that as much as I do the 35/2.
And before anyone comes again with this fake Rolex nonsense. I also have an Original 8element - actually the very rare original LTM version, too.
However I now prefer the smaller and lighter collapsible - it's cheaper and thus I can use it in the rain or in the street without a worry - the improved optics are a nice bonus.
Also none of their lenses bear the Leica name anywhere and are visibly engraved with "Made in China" in several places.
Notably on the name ring, the lens barrel as well as the caps and hoods.
People who buy gear so that others can see that they have a "proper" Leica instead of shooting pictures need their heads checked.
They also improved the optical design so that there is less coma while still retaining the signature look of what I'll just call "gentle sharpness" vs the crunchy look of later lenses.
It's one of my daily drivers, especially on Canon LTM bodies. I also quite like their take on the ELCAN which I also have in LTM, altough I do not quite like that as much as I do the 35/2.
And before anyone comes again with this fake Rolex nonsense. I also have an Original 8element - actually the very rare original LTM version, too.
However I now prefer the smaller and lighter collapsible - it's cheaper and thus I can use it in the rain or in the street without a worry - the improved optics are a nice bonus.
Also none of their lenses bear the Leica name anywhere and are visibly engraved with "Made in China" in several places.
Notably on the name ring, the lens barrel as well as the caps and hoods.
People who buy gear so that others can see that they have a "proper" Leica instead of shooting pictures need their heads checked.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
You seem to have been driven into an awful emotional tizzy over this. There is an irony here, seeing a guy who has posted multiple times railing against fakes and using ARTIFICIAL intelligence to defend his position. People don't buy these lenses to fool themselves or anyone else. They're bought by real photographers who like the image quality but have been priced out of the original, which has been discontinued for 30 years.
WoodallP
Pragmatist Barnack lover
Yes this innovation crossed my mind too, and if I recall well, when the 8 element was released it was stated that parts were not interchangeable with the original, which is another plus point for them. I think LLL stay on the side of homage and improvement (with a few fun customisations for those willing to pay) whereas the Mandler crosses the line a little too much with the lens name, box and general appearance. I suspect that Leica's lawyers are watching carefully.
WoodallP
Pragmatist Barnack lover
Does anyone know if there is any relationship between this lens and the Polar 35mm f2 that was mentioned in early 24? Someone has probably already said something and I missed it.
aw614
Well-known
My main superficial complaint about the LLL 8E collapsible is the lens cap it comes with will not stay on the lens and always falls off. I wanted a fastish LTM 35mm without the issues of finding an older lens and I got that with the LLL 8E.
I took a "Leica" lens cap that came with my Nikkor 5cm F2 as it fits snugly on the lens and doesn't fall off. 😆
I took a "Leica" lens cap that came with my Nikkor 5cm F2 as it fits snugly on the lens and doesn't fall off. 😆
Formerly presspass
Member
I am old enough to remember when anything made it Japan was assumed to be of lower quality if not outright junk. That, obviously, changed over the past 70+ years. I wonder if we're in the same mindset with items made in China?
I have two of the LLL lenses - both M mount - and enjoy using them. So far, they have held up well and I like the smaller size, similar to early rangefinder lenses. Has anyone seen or used the new Mandler lens?
I have two of the LLL lenses - both M mount - and enjoy using them. So far, they have held up well and I like the smaller size, similar to early rangefinder lenses. Has anyone seen or used the new Mandler lens?
