When is a Leica not a Leica?

[Johannes Knightworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Anyways ..... I got a leica for my 13th birthday along with a 50mm summicron lens, this was in 1968 or so. I am still using this camera, why ? .... because it hasn't broke yet.

 

I have purchased others since, Most of them older than I am, why ? ..... because they don't break.....

 

Would I buy an M8 ? .... no way, why, read the M8 threads, they are not the leicas people associate Leicas with ... high quality, virtually unbreakable cameras .... I guess these days have passed despite the little guy with the broken glasses checking the quality....

 

Ever since introducing electronics in their cameras, leica has become, well, just another camera manufacturer, the old heritage red-dot doesn't make the difference anymore, only for doctors and lawyers and such, folk whom can actually afford them, and are willing to pay the price. Nothing wrong with that mind you, I'm not pointing my finger and stamping my foot, but who cares when a leica is a leica and when not, the only thing you can be sure of, is that it will cost more .....

 

I can't resist, ..... and owning a leica doesn't really extend the size of ones dick...... I should know I own quite a few .... :-)

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[farnz]

Ever since I was a young boy

I've played the little red dot ... et cetera

LOL. Come on Mr Townsend, beat that!

[rob_x2004]

Welcome to the forum Brian, look forward to seeing some of your 28cronM6. Reckon the 28 would be a neat bit of gear.

 

Had me in stitches Johannes...but you are going to have to watch the ambiguous bits:rolleyes:

and owning a leica doesn't really extend the size of ones dick...... I should know I own quite a few .... :-)

Some smart cooky is going to suggest you can only have one stitched on at a time.

 

You have only got one...havent you?

[hamey]

When is a Leica not a Leica?.

 

Simple answer, .....WHEN IT'S NOT MADE IN THEIR OWN FACTORY

 

Panasonic is not a Leica Factory.

 

I have no problems were Leicas are made, but I do prefer in JAPAN.

 

We have two cars a HONDA CRV, and a Ford metour.

On the metour, the badge on the grill shows FORD, but every were else, it states MAZDA. so who are we trying to kid.

 

Call Panasonic and ask them for a given number of cameras, and what ever you want to call it, I am sure they will accommodate you.

 

Cheers.

[Rag9fx]

Hello All,

 

Thanks for all your input... normaly things like this don't bother me ... and to be honest it won't take away from my enjoyment of shooting with Leica kit. Its just good see what peoples oppinons are on the matter.

 

In retrospect i remember telling my friend that his D2 had panasonic guts and his face just dropped... (not that he is hardcore Leicaphile... i remember that that purchase was made on the point that it was the best reviewed camera in one periodical or another... )

 

Cheers,

 

Rob

[KM-25]

I guess it all depends on what you expect from Leica.

 

Getting down to brass tacks, if the Leica name and logo is on the camera, then it is a Leica.

 

But for some, a certain design, functionality and performance is what makes Leica a Leica.

 

For me, when I think of Leica, I think of one of my M6's or my M3. In other words, a buttery smooth camera that can be used 99% to it's ability without a battery. The M7 is a camera I will never own because it requires a battery to operate. An M8 is a camera I will never own because it needs a battery and worse, it crops the best glass in the world.

 

Having said this, I use my two M6's and one M3 professionally. They never let me down and give me the experience and images that I expect from a real Leica.

 

....The very cameras that made Leica famous in the first place.

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ever since I was a young boy

I've played the little red dot

From Solms down to Kyoto

I must of played them all

But I ain't seen nothing like him

In any factory hall

That deaf, dumb and blind dude

Sure manufactures the best digicam of all ....

 

He stands there like a statue

Becomes part of the machine

Feeling all the switches

Always playing clean

He checks by intuition

The digit counters fall

That deaf, dumb and blind dude

Makes sure it's the best Cam of all

 

Dada dada dada .....

 

I like it.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[ho_co]

As an owner of a CL, I think that the comparision between the Leitz-Minolta agreement of the '70s and the present Leica-Panasonic is really fitting: in both cases, Germans needed technologies they did not have in house, would cost too much to develop inside, took agreements with outsiders: this is a standard in the world of industrial products with different technologies inside; CL is undoubtly a Leica product, lenses are classic Wetzlars, VF/RF with frames is Leitz heritage, vertical metal shutter is pure Japanese, the result is a fine camera, period; so as the Saab 9.3 Diesel version is a classic Saab product that includes a Fiat-made engine with electronic injection firmware "written" inside Saab. When, in the '30s, Leitz decide to switch from sheet metal bending to metal casting for the body of Leica, they surely setup a cast department in Wetzlar... nowadays a similar choice would be seen as ridicolous... good casters are everywhere in Germany, Europe and where you like. A Leica IS a real Leica for the simple reason that a Company that has the right to bear this name puts the product on the market: it shall be the market itself that, if they do not take care af their reputation, shall start to respond "yes, a Leica, BUT..."

Luigi--

All valid points. But I take minor exception to two:

1) Leica needed Minolta space, not technical abilities. In other words, Leica needed a quick and cheaper way to get a lower-price camera into production when the M5 turned out not to do as well as they had hoped. In fact, Minolta found themselves unable to produce some parts of the camera, and Wetzlar. had to supply them to Minolta. (Just more proof that it was a German design.)

 

2) Wasn't the CL shutter cloth instead of metal?

 

You mention that production techniques have changed (no one would set up a casting department at Solms). In the 30's thru '50's the parallel would have been the fact that various lens designers moved between Leitz and Zeiss. A given design might have come from a particular designer working for Leitz, a similar one from the same person a couple years previously when he worked for Zeiss. Leitz design? Zeiss design? Mandler design.

 

--HC

[peterb]

If you're in a camera shop and you see a camera with a big red dot on it that says "Lieca" then it's not a Leica.

 

 

Peter

[ho_co]

I wouldn't be too sure about the Panasonic branded versions sometimes being the units that didn't make the grade with Leica.

Sean--

Thanks. You and a couple others have read deeper into my statement than I had hoped. That is, you read what I said and not what I meant.

 

Parallel: Linhof picks lenses off the Schneider line. Linhof checks them, takes the best, labels them "Linhof" and sells them for more than the standard Schneider lenses. Some lenses that Linhof didn't pick as 'best of breed' are still good and are sold by Schneider. On the other hand, Linhof takes only a very small quantity of Schneider's production; so it's clear that other non-Linhof branded Schneider lenses are up to Linhof's QC and not chosen simply because Linhof has already filled their needs.

 

Although I said this applied to cameras (boy you guys are literal), I was actually referring to components.

 

Is this something your dealer told you?

No, Ian, it's something that Leica told me when I queried them about the D2: Leica takes the 'tighter' assemblies. (I assume that refers to the lens/sensor assemblies, but I don't know for sure.)

 

It's obvious that the Leica-branded products are in different body shells than the Panasonic equivalent, so it should be obvious that the Leica/Panasonic branding choice doesn't occur after the finished production--but some comments to my remark above make it clear that that point didn't come across.

 

Since Leica has personnel on-site, it's clear that they do something. It is my understanding that they approve the assemblies (whatever they are) before they are built into cameras.

 

Summary: I said above that Leica takes some 'cameras,' leaving others to appear under Panasonic's name. That was wrong. I should have said that Leica chooses among units coming off the so-called Panasonic line (i.e. the line that will go into the Leica and Panasonic and possibly other brands) a certain number of items, rejecting some that may go into other finished but non-Leica-branded products. When Leica has chosen the assemblies to be sold under its name, the Leica inspectors no longer check the assemblies. Among the units yet to come will certainly be some that would have met Leica's pick standards, as well as some that would not have.

 

That's what I should have said above, but I thought that got a bit convoluted and oversimplified what I said.

 

Thanks to all for catching the overstatement.

 

--HC

 

PS--

And there are many other reasons to prefer the Leica to the Panasonic brand, as others and I have pointed out, even if you don't buy this assessment!

[eye4detail]

... first because their styling is usually more to my liking and second because I know the way Leica supports their products and their customers.

 

I know the people at Leica, and I say that when the red dot goes on, it's a Leica. (By that I don't mean that the red dot makes it a Leica, but that the red dot certifies that it meets Leica's quality standards.)

 

--HC

 

Mythology - Faith - Disillusionment

 

To me the C-Lux 1 matched the mythology of the 'Leica' brand. The shots I took with mine were awesome compared to the rest of the competition in this point and shoot bracket. Sure, its pretentious too but the resulting subtley and sensitivity were exceptional.

 

My faith in the 'little red dot' grew. I was hooked for life and started that savings plan for an M8 (I kid you not!).

 

When my beloved C-Lux 1 died after only 4 weeks I trusted Leica would simply replace the faulty unit. After all this was their brand at stake. But alas, no. Now 6 weeks later and I am disillusioned as I await the return of my little baby from Solms.

 

The myth has been shattered, my faith destroyed, I am disillusioned because when people say Leica look after their clients I just don't see it here. Perhaps I need to buy an M8 to get the kind of mythical experience I expect? ....in which case the c-Lux 1 will never be a real Leica!

[jaapv]

Luigi--

All valid points. But I take minor exception to two:

1) Leica needed Minolta space, not technical abilities. In other words, Leica needed a quick and cheaper way to get a lower-price camera into production when the M5 turned out not to do as well as they had hoped. In fact, Minolta found themselves unable to produce some parts of the camera, and Wetzlar. had to supply them to Minolta. (Just more proof that it was a German design.)

 

 

Not quite true. Leica needed Minolta's expertise with zoom lenses, which expertise they did not have themselves,and the Agenieux connection was too loose to get the technology, plus they needed Minolta's help to build a reflex camera that did not actually lose money on every unit sold like the Leicaflex SL2 and that cooperation produced the R3 which leans heavily on Minolta technology.

[earleygallery]

Some people think that the R range cameras aren't 'real' Leicas either and think the only 'real' Leica is the M range.

 

Leica have bought in components/technology or worked in partnership with plenty of other manufacturers for years - Minolta, Fuji and Panasonic being the most recent. Most if not all of their 35mm compacts were produced by third parties.

 

As for the only 'real' Leica being one made in a Leica factory, what about the components that are bought in such as the M bodies.....? Much of the M8 is made from components actually produced elsewhere. Some may be shocked and appalled to find that their M camera isn't in fact carved from a solid lump of brass, by an elderly craftsman in a brown overall working by desklamp with a set of well worn but trusty chisels!

 

I'm not saying that you could compare a C Lux or whatever to and M or R - surely you wouldn't expect to either.

 

OK the Panasonic/Leica cameras are the most obvious case of badge engineering, but then the differences come down to the firmware - Leica seem to veer towards a more natural result, although the differences may be very slight and not always preferable -and bundle of stuff that you get with the camera (including after sales service/warranty).

[ski542002]

Hello:

 

To me, a Leica is about the glass, and not the mechanics of the camera (Panasonic or otherwise), although I will say that there is nothing like a Leica rangefinder. This is something no other manufacturer has been able to accurately replicate to Leica's discerning level, in my opinion.

 

I shoot with primarily Canon cameras, and have currently an LX2 and in the past, an LC1. When individuals post M and R images on-line on this and other forums, I can see the great contrast and detail in deep shadows, something I don't see with other optics. I also see this in the pana/leicas, abit usually noisier than their purebred counterparts.

 

CD

[andit]

Hi all,

 

Let's not forget that the M8 is also a collaboration product. Leica does not produce the sensor in the camera. It is manufactured by Kodak.

 

Andreas

[jdlaing]

When it does not have the name Leica on the camera body or lens it is not a Leica.

 

For andit: After all these years Mother Kodak still has her fingerprints all over photography.

[Enrique Santa]

Hi Roberto, I can imagine somebody in solms answering:" I feel happy you made us this question We are thinking about it since 4 or 5 years ago".

I think a Leica is a Leica as it is a hight quality , strong and practic photographic tool, it isn´t something to put on a cabinet display.

In that sense you can be sure that C lux, D lux and V lux are more phograhic tools than those M8´s that in a few months are going to happen to the eternal rest in their luxury boxes.

[wonson1]

I had a Panasonic FX-01 which I traded in for a Leica C-Lux 1. My experience is that the FX-01 produced sharper photoa than the C lux which is dissapointing. Also the c lux appears to be noisier at 200 and 400.

Has anyone compared the C lux 1 and 2 - is there any reason to upgrade?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear