Light Lens Lab - 35mm f1.4 Aspherical now in production

[Freakscene]

My 11874 is mildly decentered. It probably passed QA in 2001 because it was centered enough for film, but on high megapixel sensors it's more evident.

So we will see...

My black 11874 was slightly decentered too. But my current chrome 11883 is perfect. Agree on optical QA/QC and how it has been applied through time. How all these parameters get measured has completely changed too. The stuff Elcan made for various military contracts was crazily precise.

 

[Slumgullion]

My black 11874 was slightly decentered too. But my current chrome 11883 is perfect. Agree on optical QA/QC and how it has been applied through time. How all these parameters get measured has completely changed too. The stuff Elcan made for various military contracts was crazily precise.

I'd inquired with DAG about the centering issue and he said it was most likely the aspherical element. Said it was a pain-in-the-ass to try to center it better and was not something he'd be interested in attempting (always have to remind myself that the enemy of good is perfect). I also asked Leica NJ about it. The customer service rep seemed to indictate it was something they could tackle. Not sure whether that's true or not. At any rate, in practice, it's not really an issue...but, if I could have it improved, I would.

 

[Ororaro]

I don't totally believe that you are asking this in earnest.

There is a a lot of truth and a pinch of hyperbole in your answer to the "why the AA" question, but your passion and excitement comes through (for the record, I have no qualms with hyperbole), and excitement and passion is the core of all of this.

I'd counter by pointing out that the Leica AA (currently) exists at a price point that, unless your relationship to money is massively different than mine (and it easily might be), purchasing one would result in immediate divorce (both nuptially and from reality). For me, having a replica is a way to honor some of that design history or feel a bit of the emotion of it. I know that the replica isn't the real thing. I don't think anyone is telling themselves it is. The replica, especially in titanium, looks cool (and was never an option from Leica). You might say that none of those things matter to you and maybe they don't. You might even think my rationale is dumb (and maybe it is). But, I've liked all the LLL lenses that I have. They are fun to shoot...and taking pictures (and having fun) is ultimately the point of the photographic hobby. Your mileage may vary.

(also, you could argue the Minolta 35/1.4 of 1988 is the mother of modern design, at least in how it pertains to the industry at-large from SLR's to modern mirrorless, but that's my two cents...do you have one of those in your collection?).

My reasons for owning the AA is exactly as I said, unrelated to its optical performance, as many photographs in one of my books were shot on a Vilia camera, plastic lens and all.

But of course the fact that the AA somewhat appreciated in value helps.

I personally don’t see a substantial difference between the AA Versus the 35 summilux asph. but that’s easily explained by the fact that the asph. was made to replace the AA while keeping the same high quality performance.

But I’m a bit different than the regular photo folks in the way I use my equipment. I tend to use equipment and see the results 5 to years down the road. Like right now I’m still working on negatives shot before 2019… the negatives shot in 2025 will be worked on and analyzed on darkroom prints somewhere in 2030 and beyond…