earleygallery Posted September 25, 2013 Share #1 Posted September 25, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's been discussed here many times, the mythical differences between the Leica and Panasonic models. In today's Amateur Photographer they are quoted as saying that differences between models are the menu's in the firmware (note, specifically no mention of any differences to the image settings or jpeg processing), bundled software, body design (Audi styled the C casing apparently!) and 'exclusive' Leica accessories. At last we can finally stop all the nonsense about special lens coatings, firmware settings or Leica selecting the best component samples and tossing the rejects to Panasonic! 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 25, 2013 Posted September 25, 2013 Hi earleygallery, Take a look here Leica comment on the PanaLeicas. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest badbob Posted September 25, 2013 Share #2 Posted September 25, 2013 It's been discussed here many times, the mythical differences between the Leica and Panasonic models. In today's Amateur Photographer they are quoted as saying that differences between models are the menu's in the firmware (note, specifically no mention of any differences to the image settings or jpeg processing), bundled software, body design (Audi styled the C casing apparently!) and 'exclusive' Leica accessories. At last we can finally stop all the nonsense about special lens coatings, firmware settings or Leica selecting the best component samples and tossing the rejects to Panasonic! Not until my 'C' arrives and I make the actual comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunom Posted September 26, 2013 Share #3 Posted September 26, 2013 James when you say that in today's AP " they are quoted as saying . . ." are you referring to AP or Leica and Panasonic ? Regards Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunom Posted September 26, 2013 Share #4 Posted September 26, 2013 James, when you say that in today's AP " they are quoted as saying . . ." are you referring to AP or Leica and Panasonic ? Regards Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 26, 2013 Author Share #5 Posted September 26, 2013 (edited) James, when you say that in today's AP " they are quoted as saying . . ." are you referring to AP or Leica and Panasonic ?Regards Bruno Amateur Photographer magazine asked Leica to comment on the 'allegations' that their compact digital cameras (not the X or M ranges) were re-badged Panasonics, and sold for much higher prices - "Leica defends camera pricing policy". Leica responded with the points above. They stated the differences in packaging (design of body, bundled software, accessories etc). They did not mention any differences in the guts of the camera or lens - they are the same in technical/image making terms as the Panasonic counterparts. Edited September 26, 2013 by earleygallery 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 26, 2013 Share #6 Posted September 26, 2013 Amateur Photographer magazine asked Leica to comment on the 'allegations' that their compact digital cameras (not the X or M ranges) were re-badged Panasonics, and sold for much higher prices - "Leica defends camera pricing policy". Leica responded with the points above. They stated the differences in packaging (design of body, bundled software, accessories etc). They did not mention any differences in the guts of the camera or lens - they are the same in technical/image making terms as the Panasonic counterparts. There's an old saying that may be the key to understanding what Leica said and what they meant. -- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". -- It's just a matter of days now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 26, 2013 Author Share #7 Posted September 26, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) There's an old saying that may be the key to understanding what Leica said and what they meant. -- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". -- It's just a matter of days now. Badbob you must be livid that Leica responded to AP but didn't respond to your letter! They were asked to state the differences, which they did. It would seem very odd not to mention fundamental improvements in image quality or performance if they exist, which they don't! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 26, 2013 Share #8 Posted September 26, 2013 Badbob you must be livid that Leica responded to AP but didn't respond to your letter! They were asked to state the differences, which they did. It would seem very odd not to mention fundamental improvements in image quality or performance if they exist, which they don't! You have made endless posts on this subject but made zero comparisons. I invested another $700 after my LF1 so I can do the comparison, and you seem to be telling people "Don't look - there's nothing to see here". Well, there is something and we will see when the 'C' arrives and I do the compare. So please stay tuned. You may be right, but let's look at the images instead of just disclaiming what nobody can see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 26, 2013 Author Share #9 Posted September 26, 2013 You have made endless posts on this subject but made zero comparisons. I invested another $700 after my LF1 so I can do the comparison, and you seem to be telling people "Don't look - there's nothing to see here". Well, there is something and we will see when the 'C' arrives and I do the compare. So please stay tuned. You may be right, but let's look at the images instead of just disclaiming what nobody can see. Arrgghh! I'm simply relaying what LEICA (who should know best) have said. There's nothing to 'see'. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 26, 2013 Share #10 Posted September 26, 2013 Arrgghh! I'm simply relaying what LEICA (who should know best) have said. There's nothing to 'see'. So you are completely unaware of what a disclaimer is? And why would you claim that a statement by anyone, including Leica, is proof of anything? Don't you believe that the proof is in the actual images? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northwest Wanderer Posted September 26, 2013 Share #11 Posted September 26, 2013 James, There is a joke about an old Jewish fellow praying at the wall everyday. It reminds me of your trying to explain things to Badbob. Seems after months of watching the guy praying a woman finally gets up the nerve to ask him if his prayers are being answered. The old guy turns to her and says It's like talking to a wall. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 26, 2013 Share #12 Posted September 26, 2013 James, There is a joke about an old Jewish fellow praying at the wall everyday. It reminds me of your trying to explain things to Badbob. Seems after months of watching the guy praying a woman finally gets up the nerve to ask him if his prayers are being answered. The old guy turns to her and says It's like talking to a wall. I understand what you're saying. Just take James' word (or yours) and ignore that man behind the curtain. Uh-huh. Oh, BTW, did you read where I have the 'C' on order and will do the comparison? Maybe you think I should just forget about that comparison, and take James' word as the ultimate authority. Are you taking the koolaid here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northwest Wanderer Posted September 26, 2013 Share #13 Posted September 26, 2013 Badbob, Have you no sense of humor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 26, 2013 Author Share #14 Posted September 26, 2013 I understand what you're saying. Just take James' word (or yours) and ignore that man behind the curtain. Uh-huh. Oh, BTW, did you read where I have the 'C' on order and will do the comparison? Maybe you think I should just forget about that comparison, and take James' word as the ultimate authority. Are you taking the koolaid here? My words don't count but you refuse to accept Leicas word. There's no comparison to make. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 26, 2013 Share #15 Posted September 26, 2013 Badbob,Have you no sense of humor? Did you ever see the film Used Cars? One of my favorites. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 26, 2013 Share #16 Posted September 26, 2013 My words don't count but you refuse to accept Leicas word. There's no comparison to make. Sure - classic disinformation. Leica's word, explaining in an unambiguous quote that says "they're the same" - and I don't require those exact words - I'm flexible. They could say "we don't change anything except cosmetics". But you don't have anything like that, and you have a clear intent to prevent anyone finding out in an actual test. So until you produce the test images, you got nothing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aesop Posted September 27, 2013 Share #17 Posted September 27, 2013 ...Badbob, leaving aside any personal/subjective views on testing, can you think of any reason(s) why Leica would shy away from stating emphatically that, other than the points cited in the AP piece, the Panasonic cameras are materially different from their own (Leica) versions? Thanks. For what it is worth, I have not read the AP piece - but I do own both Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 and Leica D-Lux 6 cameras. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 27, 2013 Share #18 Posted September 27, 2013 ...Badbob, leaving aside any personal/subjective views on testing, can you think of any reason(s) why Leica would shy away from stating emphatically that, other than the points cited in the AP piece, the Panasonic cameras are materially different from their own (Leica) versions? Thanks. For what it is worth, I have not read the AP piece - but I do own both Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 and Leica D-Lux 6 cameras. Leica has a valuable relationship with Panasonic, and passing any notices or hints that their Panasonic-made cameras are superior, either via better-made parts or simply by hand-selection of samples that pass more stringent tests, would jeapordize that relationship. I've been there with different products and know the game. Not saying I know somehow that Leica is getting better hardware in their Pana-Leica cameras - I have no idea actually, but there are a few serious individuals who believe so, and the upcoming test may or may not reveal anything. I feel most comfortable knowing that such a test can be made. If the test is negative or inconclusive it won't be my judgement - the images have to provide that answer. And if the test is negative or inconclusive I still need to get another LX7 to compare to my D-Lux6 G-Star. Not to beat the dead horse, but to get the images made and posted. Once that's done it's out of my hands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 27, 2013 Share #19 Posted September 27, 2013 Adding to the previous post, one of the things that drove me to order the 'C' and make the test is when I compared the LF1 to the D-Lux6, and found that the LF1 lens was greatly inferior to the D-Lux6 lens, having very distorted and/or smeared edges and corners while the D-Lux6 was very good edge to edge. That really bugged me, and given how bad the LF1 performed (in spite of many users saying it was "great"), I was very curious whether Leica would improve on that or not. Were I to accept the notion that Leica would use Panasonic's run-of-the-mill lens production on the 'C' without at least hand selecting the best samples, it would worry me a little. Not a lot though - just enough to make me determine to do the tests. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aesop Posted September 28, 2013 Share #20 Posted September 28, 2013 Adding to the previous post, one of the things that drove me to order the 'C' and make the test is when I compared the LF1 to the D-Lux6, and found that the LF1 lens was greatly inferior to the D-Lux6 lens, having very distorted and/or smeared edges and corners while the D-Lux6 was very good edge to edge. That really bugged me, and given how bad the LF1 performed (in spite of many users saying it was "great"), I was very curious whether Leica would improve on that or not. Were I to accept the notion that Leica would use Panasonic's run-of-the-mill lens production on the 'C' without at least hand selecting the best samples, it would worry me a little. Not a lot though - just enough to make me determine to do the tests. ...in view of Leica's comments on the matter, I can only wish you (and your approach) good luck. Enjoy. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts