Guest badbob Posted September 28, 2013 Share #21 Posted September 28, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...in view of Leica's comments on the matter, I can only wish you (and your approach) good luck. Enjoy. I've seen many comments posted here about "Leica's comments", but never a link to those comments. So are you sure they made those comments? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 28, 2013 Posted September 28, 2013 Hi Guest badbob, Take a look here Leica comment on the PanaLeicas. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pedaes Posted September 28, 2013 Share #22 Posted September 28, 2013 I've seen many comments posted here about "Leica's comments", but never a link to those comments. So are you sure they made those comments? I am. I have also heard directly from senior Leica personnel that there is no differences in the image making part of the camera - it is absolute fact that they are identical as far as output is concerned. Sorry if this is not what you hoped, but it makes little difference to the world as we know it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DES Posted September 28, 2013 Share #23 Posted September 28, 2013 OMG........UNCLE UNCLE.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 28, 2013 Author Share #24 Posted September 28, 2013 I've seen many comments posted here about "Leica's comments", but never a link to those comments. So are you sure they made those comments? Google 'amateur photographer magazine', find their website and you can buy a digital copy of this weeks magazine and read the full article for yourself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 28, 2013 Share #25 Posted September 28, 2013 I am. I have also heard directly from senior Leica personnel that there is no differences in the image making part of the camera - it is absolute fact that they are identical as far as output is concerned. Sorry if this is not what you hoped, but it makes little difference to the world as we know it. I apologize if you think I'm doubting you, but again you say "I'm sure" but offer no evidence at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 28, 2013 Author Share #26 Posted September 28, 2013 So you choose to ignore my advice and read the 'evidence' for yourself ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 28, 2013 Share #27 Posted September 28, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Google 'amateur photographer magazine', find their website and you can buy a digital copy of this weeks magazine and read the full article for yourself. By "full article" you mean that little 3 or 4 paragraph disclaimer? Are you kidding me? There was no discussion or question about image quality - zero. If that's the sort of writing you base opinions on, I'm confident there's nothing for me to be concerned about. Unbelievable!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 28, 2013 Share #28 Posted September 28, 2013 So you choose to ignore my advice and read the 'evidence' for yourself ?? You're a stranger to me. Why should I believe what you say when you have nothing compelling to offer? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 28, 2013 Share #29 Posted September 28, 2013 Attached is a screen shot from another article in Amateur Photography magazine. Now they must be talking about the X Vario, saying it has the resolution of a bridge camera. Unless I read this wrong, this does not speak well of AP's appraisal of the X Vario (or any camera), the X Vario having far better resolution than a bridge camera (typical 1/2.3 sensor). $4 I paid for AP, for nothing. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/213497-leica-comment-on-the-panaleicas/?do=findComment&comment=2430512'>More sharing options...
AlanG Posted September 28, 2013 Share #30 Posted September 28, 2013 Even if the two cameras are identical, by definition only the Leica could produce photos that you can claim have the Leica glow. So it's worth the extra cost for that alone. You never hear anyone say their photos have a "Panasonic glow" do you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Martin Posted September 29, 2013 Share #31 Posted September 29, 2013 Who woke the troll ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted September 29, 2013 Share #32 Posted September 29, 2013 So please show us under what situations the Leica version will produce a better photo than the Panasonic will. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted September 29, 2013 Share #33 Posted September 29, 2013 BTW I don't have any issue with people buying the Leica version if they like the look or what comes with it/for it better. People spend more for appearance rather than performance on all kinds of products. And I have no problem with Leica filling out its lineup this way to improve profitability. Leica has been re-badging some cameras and lenses for decades. Some or all of the Leitz Aristophot camera was made by Linhof. Various other name brand companies have been subcontracting some models for a long time too. We all know this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torquinian Posted October 1, 2013 Share #34 Posted October 1, 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! I have a V-Lux 30 and my wife a Panasonic DMC-FS35. There are a lot of similarities, but the Leica is made in Japan and the Panasonic made in China. The Leica batteries and the Panasonic batteries are both made in China, but the Leica ones cost about six times as much! The V-Lux instruction book says that non-Leica batteries may explode! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted October 1, 2013 Share #35 Posted October 1, 2013 I am not sure that those are the same basic camera. The Leica has a 16x zoom, that Panasonic only an 8x one and they have different sensors Panasonic have made scores of cameras over the years that have not had a Leica "equivalent", even the ones with the Leica-branded lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roydonian Posted October 1, 2013 Share #36 Posted October 1, 2013 I visited Milton Keynes along with a group of other Leica enthusiasts just after the Digilux I was launched, as this question of Panasonic versus Leica was raised. The response, as I recall it, was that the cameras were identical in hardware terms – apart from the styling and similar cosmetic changes, but the firmware was modified to produce the sort of imagery that the company wanted. For example, the Japanese idea of normal contrast and saturation were broadly equivalent to Leica’s –1 settings. Best regards, Doug Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted October 1, 2013 Share #37 Posted October 1, 2013 That was over 10 years ago, Roy. They no longer make any such statements. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torquinian Posted October 2, 2013 Share #38 Posted October 2, 2013 I am not sure that those are the same basic camera. The Leica has a 16x zoom, that Panasonic only an 8x one and they have different sensors I didn't say they were the same, but there are strong similarities. A non-photagrapher might think that they were the same, but if you had paid £550 for a V-Lux you would think that they were very different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share #39 Posted October 2, 2013 I am not sure that those are the same basic camera. The Leica has a 16x zoom, that Panasonic only an 8x one and they have different sensors I didn't say they were the same, but there are strong similarities. A non-photagrapher might think that they were the same, but if you had paid £550 for a V-Lux you would think that they were very different. But this discussion is about the Leica/Panasonic versions of the same camera. We know that Panasonic make other models which are very different. If you buy a V-Lux you would compare it to the equivalent Panasonic model, not just any other model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted October 2, 2013 Share #40 Posted October 2, 2013 I agree with James: If the Leica version would really be better IQ wise, then they would have told it to AP, why NOT say it if they ARE better?! You can do comparison, but I believe they are truely the same... from the inside that is, IQ wise that is... just my few seconds of life... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.