The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Leica and Zeiss combined?

V

Vivek

Guest
That might lead to the Leica logo being leased to more products like Zeiss' blue label. Overpriced, quality Tamron designed and produced optics as seen in the Sony E mount lenses. :facesmack:
 

thrice

Active member
That might lead to the Leica logo being leased to more products like Zeiss' blue label. Overpriced, quality Tamron designed and produced optics as seen in the Sony E mount lenses. :facesmack:
Unlike the Panasonic-built SL and Konica-built TL lenses?
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I had no idea! Why go to two different companies?

(Well, you could say that isn't unlike Cosina and Tamron doing the deeds for Zeiss!)

Unlike the Panasonic-built SL and Konica-built TL lenses?
 
People keep talking about Panasonic bult SL, Q and X. Yet all of these cameras are said to be at least assembled in Leica factory in Germany. So whilst Panasonic has probably contributed in these cameras, I wouldn't call'em Panasonic built.

TL I have no idea.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Konica? Didn't they disappear into Sony with Minolta?

Whatever... a merger between the two may be the only way to survival if we look a bit into the future. The competition will become stronger, and lenses from Korean and Chinese suppliers look increasingly good at a fraction of the price of Zeica lenses.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
Konica? Didn't they disappear into Sony with Minolta?

Whatever... a merger between the two may be the only way to survival if we look a bit into the future. The competition will become stronger, and lenses from Korean and Chinese suppliers look increasingly good at a fraction of the price of Zeica lenses.
Very true Jorgen. As much as I enjoy the Leica and Zeiss lenses I own, I also know that Japanese, Korean and now perhaps Chinese lenses are quite good also, at much lower costs.

I hope that Leica and Zeiss will continue to develop and make great products for many years, either separately, together or in alliances with other camera and optical companies.

Gary
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
That Zeiss deal will most probably not happen, as they want more than 45%, which Kaufmann is not going to allow.

Meanwhile Leica has evolved into a "Schicki Micki" brand that I for myself cannot and will not justify anymore and I think it became also true for so many others. Currently they are still doing remarkably well, although I cannot see how long this will go. Cameras are usually 2 years behind competition, optics are still superb, but only for superb prices and if you really compare not worth the additional money anymore.

Will become interesting again, not sure how long Kaufmann can justify this in the future ....
 
Last edited:

iiiNelson

Well-known member
IMO the greatest hindrance to the future of Leica is that the generation that beloved them the most is getting older and will eventually be replaced with those that really only have familiarity with Canon, Nikon, Sony, and the like. There's just not the same nostalgic value of a Leica camera with people in my generation (those between the Gen X and Millenial generation) or younger. When I was in high school this was the time (mid to late 90's) when Digital photography was starting to become more accessible to the average middle class family. That coupled with the fact that more people are increasingly comfortable with just a cellphone camera, the price of entry into a Leica system, and the perceived value for the system and there's not a surprise that Leica's model
may not be one of long term survivability if there's another worldwide economic crisis in the near future.

Now in reality I like Zeiss about as much as I like Leica and in many ways I prefer Zeiss lenses to Leica ones. I think they're both at the top of the game in 35mm based systems in lens design across the board. Yes, there are Asian companies that may surpass them both in resolution and MTF charts for a small fraction of the price but there's a reason in why people pay more for a certain look. I wonder if a Zeiss infusion of money would lead to a Digital Ikon... that would be an interesting digital entry level camera for reasonable prices.
 

Bernard

Member
People keep talking about Panasonic bult SL, Q and X. Yet all of these cameras are said to be at least assembled in Leica factory in Germany. So whilst Panasonic has probably contributed in these cameras, I wouldn't call'em Panasonic built.
Exactly. People love to insinuate that Leica cameras are 'actually Panasonic," but they never supply any evidence, other than circumstantial (Leica's P&S cameras are made by Panasonic, and Leica badges some Pana MFT lenses).

I would argue that Leica's core technology is the Maestro processor, which is built by Fujitsu (not to be confused with Fuji Film), or was at one time.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
IMO the greatest hindrance to the future of Leica is that the generation that beloved them the most is getting older and will eventually be replaced with those that really only have familiarity with Canon, Nikon, Sony, and the like. There's just not the same nostalgic value of a Leica camera with people in my generation (those between the Gen X and Millenial generation) or younger. When I was in high school this was the time (mid to late 90's) when Digital photography was starting to become more accessible to the average middle class family. That coupled with the fact that more people are increasingly comfortable with just a cellphone camera, the price of entry into a Leica system, and the perceived value for the system and there's not a surprise that Leica's model
may not be one of long term survivability if there's another worldwide economic crisis in the near future.

Now in reality I like Zeiss about as much as I like Leica and in many ways I prefer Zeiss lenses to Leica ones. I think they're both at the top of the game in 35mm based systems in lens design across the board. Yes, there are Asian companies that may surpass them both in resolution and MTF charts for a small fraction of the price but there's a reason in why people pay more for a certain look. I wonder if a Zeiss infusion of money would lead to a Digital Ikon... that would be an interesting digital entry level camera for reasonable prices.
I could not agree more, although I am more of an older age photographer than you. But even then I must say that I as a real Leica lover was more than disappointed by a number of steps they did and this dates back over the past 15-20 years at least. Currently Kaufmann is developing Leica into this "noble" brand which is maybe good for him and his family (at least I hope so) but is definitely not for a number of Leica lovers as I always have been. And I am not only talking about price, but more about the whole feeling of this brand.

I also agree that I do love certain Zeiss lenses more than their Leica counterparts (or at least what comes close). Hopefully Zeiss would get some influence o Leica ad maybe develop ad produce some closer cameras ad lenses more for the average user who still wants high quality and does not care about any of the luxury appeals currently being the base of so many Leica models (cameras and lenses). I for myself could totally live without that ✌
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I could not agree more, although I am more of an older age photographer than you. But even then I must say that I as a real Leica lover was more than disappointed by a number of steps they did and this dates back over the past 15-20 years at least. Currently Kaufmann is developing Leica into this "noble" brand which is maybe good for him and his family (at least I hope so) but is definitely not for a number of Leica lovers as I always have been. And I am not only talking about price, but more about the whole feeling of this brand.

I also agree that I do love certain Zeiss lenses more than their Leica counterparts (or at least what comes close). Hopefully Zeiss would get some influence o Leica ad maybe develop ad produce some closer cameras ad lenses more for the average user who still wants high quality and does not care about any of the luxury appeals currently being the base of so many Leica models (cameras and lenses). I for myself could totally live without that ✌
Price will always be a factor though and is a barrier to entry for many photographers that I gather would enjoy Leica products if not for the price, distribution, and familiarity barrier. I know it's sacrilege in some circles to complain about the price, and I'm not, but it behooves them to make a reasonably accessible full frame camera along with the halo camera. I know the TL exists but it seems to be more of an "afterthought" system much in the way that the rebranded Panasonic compact camera are... I mean there are only 6 lenses available for that system for a reason.

That being said Leica has one truly unique product and that's the M. Truth be told they'd do themselves a huge favor by making a stripped down mirrorless EVF M style "rangefinder camera" as an "entry level camera" to cut down on costs that has the M mount for ~$4K (because it's Leica and anyone else would sell it in the $2-2.5K range). They can make it wherever (it doesn't have to be made in Germany) to save on costs and this can serve as a cheaper second body or a body for those that have old lenses that may use another brand of DSLR/Mirrorless/Medium Format for most shooting jobs but want something simple for hobby shooting. There's also the fact that many Leica M users are getting older and simply can't focus a M as well as they once could but still like the size and style of a M where the SL may seem to be not the right size for them. I think we see some M users that have flocked to other systems for this reason which leads to another flaw of the M system. It's just not the best system to use for ultra wide (wider than 24-28mm) or telephoto (longer than 90-135). An EVF could open up the M to some longer designs like another 180/2.8 or a 300/4 or 5.6 lens for trips such as a safari or reportage. The High ISO ability is there with the SL and M10 for sure and yes one could use the Live view LCD but many are more comfortable with a EVF now.

None of this will likely ever happen anytime soon if ever and that's why I chose to move on from Leica though I still really like the idea of owning a M (M240 series notwithstanding) and would possibly own one again at some point in the future if they get the QC and service back under control.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Yes indeed all those Leica owners out there only buy Leica because they are old and silly it is only a matter of time before SoCaNikon will rule the universe.:lecture:
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Funny! :ROTFL:

Yes indeed all those Leica owners out there only buy Leica because they are old and silly it is only a matter of time before SoCaNikon will rule the universe.:lecture:
 

thrice

Active member
Exactly. People love to insinuate that Leica cameras are 'actually Panasonic," but they never supply any evidence, other than circumstantial (Leica's P&S cameras are made by Panasonic, and Leica badges some Pana MFT lenses).

I would argue that Leica's core technology is the Maestro processor, which is built by Fujitsu (not to be confused with Fuji Film), or was at one time.
Okay here we go:
https://leicarumors.com/2015/08/13/...turer-with-tight-relations-to-panasonic.aspx/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_Semiconductor

http://eriknaso.com/2015/10/20/full...asonic-vlog-included-wait-what-could-this-be/

The sensor arrives attached to the logic board.
The shell arrives fully assembled and painted from Portugal.
Final assembly is carried out in Wetzlar, just enough that they can stamp it "Made in Germany".
 

thrice

Active member
Konica? Didn't they disappear into Sony with Minolta?

Whatever... a merger between the two may be the only way to survival if we look a bit into the future. The competition will become stronger, and lenses from Korean and Chinese suppliers look increasingly good at a fraction of the price of Zeica lenses.
https://www.dailycameranews.com/2014/01/konica-minolta-23mm-f2-lens-patent/
https://photorumors.com/2016/01/10/the-latest-patents-from-canon-sigma-and-konica-minolta/

No prizes for guessing which cameras those lenses fit on.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Yes indeed all those Leica owners out there only buy Leica because they are old and silly it is only a matter of time before SoCaNikon will rule the universe.:lecture:
Old and silly... your words.

I wouldn't characterize Leica owners as such. I was a Leica owner at about 29 (if that can count as old in silly) but I know the reaction that most people had to seeing a M9.

It usually was "why are you shooting film... I'm not... that's a digital camera? Well once you make the jump to full frame you'll never go back to a crop sensor... that's full frame... how many frames per second, megapixels, and autofocus points aren't in there? So you have to manually do everything? How do I zoom... wait so you have to do everything from focusing, to zooming with your legs, and it costs how much? No thanks I'll stick with my [insert brand here].

The point of the story is that Leica is somewhat of a niche brand but exposure of a product and familiarity goes a long way to ensure future success. Most people don't know about HCB or Magnum to the same extent as a Leicaphile would know. People are used to more automation as well these days be it smartphone or DSLR. People flock to Canon and Nikon, not because they are far and away better than everything else, but rather they are familiar and confident in the brand. It doesn't matter that camera sales are down, that Nikon appears to be struggling financially, or that mirrorless is generally the only thing other than cinema cameras that's making strong profits - people in various cultures attribute quality with certain brands. Leica is seen as quality but younger people aren't really familiar with Leica to the same level as say Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Fuji. It doesn't mean they are better but it's no different than say in cars - far more people are familiar with Porsche, Ferrari, and Lamborghini than say a Pagani or a Kornigsegg which is just as capable performance wise but doesn't have the global saturation of the aforementioned brands. A mass produced "entry level" model would go a long way to increase awareness of the Leica brand for future generations.

That's all I was saying. No need to be defensive as I like the heritage of Leica but it seems they were in a somewhat strained financial position about 10 years ago so maybe it's time to mix some more of the old traditions and the new direction. Seems like not too long ago they abandoned the R for this reason of not being able to compete at the speed that Canon and Nikon was innovating... I doubt they can keep up with the other mirrorless makers at the pace they are moving to mature mirrorless cameras.

In all seriousness I don't know a single M owner that doesn't want a cheaper M-mount alternative that takes the same lenses, has the advantages of mirrorless like Focus peaking, image zoom for critical focus, and costs less as to not attract quite as much attention. It's not about supplanting the M but augmenting it in the key weaker areas. It really can just be a Q without the lens built in and that by itself will sell as fast as they make them. Like all things, if you fail to adapt to changing times then you will be left behind.
 

vjr

New member
Old and silly... your words.

I wouldn't characterize Leica owners as such. I was a Leica owner at about 29 (if that can count as old in silly) but I know the reaction that most people had to seeing a M9.

It usually was "why are you shooting film... I'm not... that's a digital camera? Well once you make the jump to full frame you'll never go back to a crop sensor... that's full frame... how many frames per second, megapixels, and autofocus points aren't in there? So you have to manually do everything? How do I zoom... wait so you have to do everything from focusing, to zooming with your legs, and it costs how much? No thanks I'll stick with my [insert brand here].

The point of the story is that Leica is somewhat of a niche brand but exposure of a product and familiarity goes a long way to ensure future success. Most people don't know about HCB or Magnum to the same extent as a Leicaphile would know. People are used to more automation as well these days be it smartphone or DSLR. People flock to Canon and Nikon, not because they are far and away better than everything else, but rather they are familiar and confident in the brand. It doesn't matter that camera sales are down, that Nikon appears to be struggling financially, or that mirrorless is generally the only thing other than cinema cameras that's making strong profits - people in various cultures attribute quality with certain brands. Leica is seen as quality but younger people aren't really familiar with Leica to the same level as say Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Fuji. It doesn't mean they are better but it's no different than say in cars - far more people are familiar with Porsche, Ferrari, and Lamborghini than say a Pagani or a Kornigsegg which is just as capable performance wise but doesn't have the global saturation of the aforementioned brands. A mass produced "entry level" model would go a long way to increase awareness of the Leica brand for future generations.

That's all I was saying. No need to be defensive as I like the heritage of Leica but it seems they were in a somewhat strained financial position about 10 years ago so maybe it's time to mix some more of the old traditions and the new direction. Seems like not too long ago they abandoned the R for this reason of not being able to compete at the speed that Canon and Nikon was innovating... I doubt they can keep up with the other mirrorless makers at the pace they are moving to mature mirrorless cameras.

In all seriousness I don't know a single M owner that doesn't want a cheaper M-mount alternative that takes the same lenses, has the advantages of mirrorless like Focus peaking, image zoom for critical focus, and costs less as to not attract quite as much attention. It's not about supplanting the M but augmenting it in the key weaker areas. It really can just be a Q without the lens built in and that by itself will sell as fast as they make them. Like all things, if you fail to adapt to changing times then you will be left behind.
Q with M mount exactly what is needed.
 
Top