Not to start rumors...

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jesus, I'm done... you win. The only point I'm going to make is that the Minilux was not a rebadged version of any camera (unlike the Panaleicas)... so regardless of who made it for Leica, it was definitively a Leica.

[Kloss]

Considering the pros and cons of zoom cameras I guess Leica will not build a successor of the X1 with a zoom lens for the reasons already being given by the other writers. They are offering the D-Lux and the V-Lux cameras for those customers already arn't they?

 

But keeping in mind that Leica started business with the Ur-Leica with a fixed lens followed of the Leica I with different removable lenses (35, 50, 90 180, screw lenses at those days) how about a new system of a "real Leica" (not a "badge engineered" Panasonic) rated under the quality and price of the M-System, hence how about a new "X-System"?

[mjh]

how about a new "X-System"?

Right now Leica has two systems to support, M and S, and it doesn’t look like a large part of the workforce is idly twiddling their thumbs, anxiously waiting for a new system so they would get something to do.

 

But lets suppose Leica would consider introducing a new system (and surely they will be considering lots of avenues to pursue), and lets suppose there were two candidates: One system based on the X1 and its APS-C sensor, competing against Micro FourThirds and the mirrorless systems from Samsung and Sony (and who else might enter the fray in the future), and another system built around a 36 x 24 mm sensor as its USP, doubling as the R solution repeatedly hinted at by Leica?

[jsrockit]

Considering the pros and cons of zoom cameras I guess Leica will not build a successor of the X1 with a zoom lens for the reasons already being given by the other writers. They are offering the D-Lux and the V-Lux cameras for those customers already arn't they?

 

Yes, let's just keep ignoring sensor size over and over again.

[gar1013]

Yes, let's just keep ignoring sensor size over and over again.

 

Don't forget what Panasonic will or won't want to be in on -- that plays a role as well.

[gar1013]

so regardless of who made it for Leica, it was definitively a Leica.

 

See, I disagree with that statement. It's like saying that a GM product made by Toyota is really a GM product... or that a T-Shirt that has a Chevy logo on it was made by GM. Another example is wine: a lot of wineries play fast in loose with producing wines from their own grapes as opposed to blending in juice bought on the bulk market.

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

See, I disagree with that statement. It's like saying that a GM product made by Toyota is really a GM product... or that a T-Shirt that has a Chevy logo on it was made by GM. Another example is wine: a lot of wineries play fast in loose with producing wines from their own grapes as opposed to blending in juice bought on the bulk market.

 

That's fine... you are free to disagree. However, like I said...the Minilux was not a rebadged camera. I would imagine it was designed by Leica and manufactuered in Japan. That's kind of like saying an Apple computer isn't an Apple because they are built in China by someone other than Apple.

[gar1013]

That's kind of like saying an Apple computer isn't an Apple because they are built in China by someone other than Apple.

 

There's certainly a good deal of truth to that. Apple certainly has products that are manufactured by third parties that produce products for other computer companies. Interestingly enough, that would indicate that the reliability of Apple's products stems more from the engineering and design perspective than from the actual assembly.

 

The thread on here about the manufacture of the Lumix "Leica" branded lenses is very interesting, because it indicates that Leica isn't involved in the production of those lenses.

[phancj]

There's certainly a good deal of truth to that. Apple certainly has products that are manufactured by third parties that produce products for other computer companies. Interestingly enough, that would indicate that the reliability of Apple's products stems more from the engineering and design perspective than from the actual assembly.

 

The thread on here about the manufacture of the Lumix "Leica" branded lenses is very interesting, because it indicates that Leica isn't involved in the production of those lenses.

 

Design and functionality being good, yes. For Apple, I totally disagree on reliability. My current MBP has been sent in a total of 3 times, once hard disk total failure, once bluetooth module, latest last week trackpad failure. All in span of a year. Ditto my last Mac, think the foxconn factory is not exactly reliable.

 

However, my old macs, and powerbooks are still running, albeit obsolete. USed to be made in Taiwan, where engineering appears very reliable.

[h00ligan]

For the sake of discussion I'll mention that evry single part of my MacBook pro has been replaced except the bottom case..literally everything. I certainly don't consider it to have been reliable.

 

That said, their support is EXCELLENT.

[Guest badbob]

For the sake of discussion I'll mention that evry single part of my MacBook pro has been replaced except the bottom case..literally everything. I certainly don't consider it to have been reliable.

That said, their support is EXCELLENT.

 

I've had about 10 iPods since 2005 including 4 hard drive models from 30 to 160 gb, heavily used not only as iPod but as PC backup. Also SS iPods and iPad, Mac desktop, and new Macbook Air 128. No failures so far.

[jsrockit]

The thread on here about the manufacture of the Lumix "Leica" branded lenses is very interesting, because it indicates that Leica isn't involved in the production of those lenses.

 

I always assumed that Panasonic just used Leica's name on their lenses. However, does that mean that Leica has nothing to do with the DLUX-5 at all... except cosmetic changes or do they tweak the lens too. I'm thinking the former right?

 

I've been a Mac user for 10 years now and haven't had any issue with any of the 10 laptops I've had. I did have to have my iPhone 3gs replaced though...

[h00ligan]

It's interesting that in the corporate environment the macs hold up well in all regards...except executives who travel heavily (their fault). I believe I happened to get a 'bad one'.

 

That said, thinkpad's are even more reliable..even made by lenovo.

 

I'd guess I'm probably using much more computer/electronic gear than most on this forum (technologist by trade for nearly 20 years professionally)..so my odds of getting a bad one are probably higher

[gar1013]

I always assumed that Panasonic just used Leica's name on their lenses. However, does that mean that Leica has nothing to do with the DLUX-5 at all... except cosmetic changes or do they tweak the lens too. I'm thinking the former right?

 

I've been a Mac user for 10 years now and haven't had any issue with any of the 10 laptops I've had. I did have to have my iPhone 3gs replaced though...

 

None of the "changes" I've heard to the DLux-5 mention anything regarding the lens. It's all software type changes. So yeah, now that you put it that way, I guess the DLux-5 hasn't actually had the benefit of Leica actually touching anything in the process.

[jankap]

In some years cameras will be assembled in workerless factories somewhere on the planet.

Of course there will be human power present to repair and oil the machines.

Are the products Leicas, if Leica sets the requirements of the quality assurance for those, that will carry a red dot?

This thread is near its end, I think.

Jan

[jankap]

One more.

My SE/30 was assembled in Ireland in December 1990. Is this a real Apple computer? From Apple with seat in California, USA?

On the other hand my Appenzell mountain dog was born in Germany. Is this a swiss or a german dog?

She carries my logo and is bred after german rules, so it is a german dog. Despite I am a Dutchman.

Jan

[Dan States]

The Minilux was not made by Leica: Leica Minilux

 

Explain to me why Leica would develop a compact zoom camera that's not a Panasonic at this point in time. There's no business case for it. The DLux-5 and the VLux-2 are both adequate for the zoom crowd. Furthermore, introducing an X1 zoom would require significant development expenditures, as opposed to changing the focal length - which would far less in development costs.

 

A longer focal length equivalent to the X1 does have precendent in the Sigma DP2. It's also entirely conceivable that someone would own multiple X1s in different focal lengths, as witnessed by the Sigma DP experience.

 

By your logic even the X1 would not exist. Leica has proven that there is a tremendous market for Leica products at all price levels. From the badge engineered Panasonic made cameras at the low end, to the X1, designed and assembled by Leica from proprietary and off the shelf parts, to the S and M systems.

 

Considering the overwhelming response to the X1 I'd say there is still a lot of steam in that line. Leica customers tend to be completists, with a near irrational drive to own whatever is new from the company. If they make a zoom it will sell in scads and we'll have tons of posts about how the new zoom compares to the X1 and the WATE and all the Panaleica's....

 

The record on this forum for guessing Leica's next move is dismal..From the original "you can't have a digital M" crowd, to the "They will never make a full frame" posse to the "No firmware will help the X1" gaggle....all big talkers but no first hand knowledge.

[h00ligan]

If IBM conceived, designed, farmed out production and then gave a version of that product with a different style keyboard and new logo, it wouldn't be an apple product...at it's core.

 

Listen if a company brands a product, it's their product..that said who knows how much input leica have on the cross branded products..leica and panasonic..but aside from sharing firmware voodoo so leica can create their own, the camera as a sum of its components is no different than the panasonic offering.

 

However at least now there's value in addition to the grip less body, longer warranty, and red dot..in the form of substantially better software

 

If it says leica, its a leica..it's just mostly designed and wholly built by panasonic. It's not as cut and dry as an analogy to apples contracts to assemble or as saying leica does nothing.

 

Owning light room already and seeing how quickly the small camera market changes, along with having larger hands, I wouldn't buy one of the cross brands at twice the price, but I also understand why people do.

[gar1013]

By your logic even the X1 would not exist. Leica has proven that there is a tremendous market for Leica products at all price levels. From the badge engineered Panasonic made cameras at the low end, to the X1, designed and assembled by Leica from proprietary and off the shelf parts, to the S and M systems.

 

Re-read my posts. The X1 exists because it doesn't steal sales from the M series (and actually contributes to it).

 

Again: a zoom X1, made BY LEICA, would only make sense at a price point of around $4k. Another focal length (say 50mm equivalent) would make sense at the existing price point.

 

More importantly: a Leica representative said that they weren't interested in a zoom lens for the X1. They also weren't in a position to comment on if another focal length would be considered.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Archiver]

A longer focal length equivalent to the X1 does have precendent in the Sigma DP2. It's also entirely conceivable that someone would own multiple X1s in different focal lengths, as witnessed by the Sigma DP experience.

 

I am one such person. I have the Sigma DP1 and DP2, and together they make a surprisingly well rounded duo, within certain parameters, of course. In a sense, Ricoh are doing something similar with prime APS-C modules for the GXR. One body, two modules, both high quality primes.

 

After that is another story. If I had a GXR I could justify having a third prime module, but I'd have a much harder time justifying a third Sigma of different focal length.