While this is a beautiful picture, I think the spines are way too long to be a true Echinopsis 'Los Angeles' clone. All plants I have ever seen ID'd as 'Los Angeles' have always had extremely short to almost non-existent spines. This is not growing condition dependent as I have grown this plant from full shade to full sun, and they always have had the same very short to almost invisible spines. Looking on the internet the top pictures that come up also show plants with little to no spines (like the images posted here by several other users).

I wonder if this is not the species Echinopsis oxygona. It could also be another hybrid of course, as there are quite a number with similar colored flowers.
I think the recent photo by kiwoncello is also of a plant with spines that are too long to be 'Los Angeles'.

I would like to propose that the image above (and the recent image below by @kiwoncello ) be moved to the genus listing for Echinopsis (or possibly the species listing for E. oxygona).



Please speak up if you disagree with Thijs' assessment or my proposed move. I lean toward the genus entry as the best place for these photos, but I could go with another option if one were proposed.

mcvansoest is correct. I added it incorrectly to the wrong Echinopsis Los Angeles. It is 'Diehl's Hybrid' nmumpton

Moved the image to the other entry.