Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
M9reno

T Lens Manufacturer

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Coming back to topic - the choice of a Japanese manufacturer might be simply to get access to patented technology. In-lens autofocus could be a topic, but this is just a guess.

 

Stefan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lens and optical design. But the mechanics might be on the weak side no matter the brand.

 

Bruno

 

Ive just bought the Voigtlander close focus M adapter for my Sony A7 and it is top quality, my friend is Leica through and through says it is Leica quality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are kind of missing the point, or don't really understand what outsourcing manufacturing is all about.

 

As an example, my company makes many high precision parts for numerous aerospace and electronics companies...all we do is make the parts to the customer's specifications, period. A manufacturer does not design the parts, they merely machine and assemble things to their client's detailed specifications, including exact materials and measurements as provided through 3D CAD files and engineering drawings.

 

The lenses are "Leica lenses" regardless of where they are made or by who.

Edited by Carbon111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think people are kind of missing the point, or don't really understand what outsourcing manufacturing is all about.

 

As an example, my company makes many high precision parts for numerous aerospace and electronics companies...all we do is make the parts to the customer's specifications, period. A manufacturer does not design the parts, they merely machine and assemble things to their client's detailed specifications, including exact materials and measurements as provided through 3D CAD files and engineering drawings.

 

The lenses are "Leica lenses" regardless of where they are made or by who.

 

Not according to the die-hard Luddite

fraternity who will never ever accept the fact that Leica optics (and cameras) made wholly or partly e.g. in Asia can be just as good quality as those made in Germany.

 

They seldom buy or use the 'foreign' goods - they just moan - and hark back to days of yore

 

dunk

Edited by dkpeterborough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not according to the die-hard Luddite fraternity who will never ever accept the fact that Leica optics (and cameras) made wholly or partly e.g. in Asia can be just as good quality as those made in Germany.

 

They seldom buy or use the 'foreign' goods - they just moan - and hark back to days of yore

 

dunk

 

Either a manufacturer can accurately build your design to your specifications or you find someone else. That's just how it works.

 

FWIW, any *externally made* components would still have to go through Leica's own QC process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

FWIW, any *externally made* components would still have to go through Leica's own QC process.

 

 

So how did some horribly defective 'made in Germany' optics find their way to consumers?

 

 

 

Sent from my Etcha-sketch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not according to the die-hard Luddite fraternity who will never ever accept the fact that Leica optics (and cameras) made wholly or partly e.g. in Asia can be just as good quality as those made in Germany.

 

Some stereotypes never die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So how did some horribly defective 'made in Germany' optics find their way to consumers?

 

Sent from my Etcha-sketch.

 

Because no QA system is 100% efficient.

 

dunk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So how did some horribly defective 'made in Germany' optics find their way to consumers?

 

Because they did.

 

QC might have not sampled a large enough quantity for a representative sample...or the flaw was caused by something not checked for...or tolerance stacking may not have been accounted for in a process. Any number of things, really. Machines, people and materials are all fallible.

 

QC is about continual improvement, and refining of the QC process, not perfection. Just be glad there's a process in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Everybody,

 

This is a really interesting Thread.

 

Given all of the discussions in all of the directions in the many pages of this Thread above: It would appear that the reason for outsourcing lens production to wherever is:

 

The need for the availability of an infrastructure with a great enough capacity to produce whatever technology is required in the quality & numbers envisioned as necessary.

 

It does not appear that the availability of competent people to produce lenses/electronics/mechanisms is the issue. It seems that it is the availability of a production facility in the time frame necessary, within the budget constraints defined & within the risk parameters defined, that goes along with any new venture in a new direction, that makes up the issue.

 

Another thought:

 

If: "Trained for years, Unionized, Expensive, 35 hour week, 30 days off vacation" produces people who do such good work that they set the standards for everyone else in the World: Then there should be a lot more of it. Thank you Georg (Post #69 above, this Thread).

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited by Michael Geschlecht

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jvansmit
It is a very long time ago that Leica supplied glass for lenses. For many decades they rely on glass provided by large glass companies like Hoya, Schott or Pilkington, who supply the blanks from which lenses are ground ( or pressed).

 

as confirmed in an interesting Peter Karbe 2009 interview talking about glass & lens design:

 

"Establishing a balance between factors, including performance, size, choice of the appropriate glasses, and production tolerances, required lots of patient development work and numerous experiments and trials. For example, the glass I chose for lens element 3 is of crucial importance in minimizing the secondary color aberration. This glass, formerly made at the Leitz glass laboratory, was for a long time offered by another supplier who had taken over its production. But they had stopped making it, so I had to “encourage” another German glassmaker to literally reinvent this glass type. Today this glass is extremely expensive. Indeed, the material for this lens element alone costs as much as the glass used in all the other lens elements of the Summilux 50mm f/1.4 ASPH! In short, optical design software, as useful as it can be, will not help in choosing the appropriate glass types, especially those used to minimize secondary chromatic aberration"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think people are kind of missing the point, or don't really understand what outsourcing manufacturing is all about.

 

As an example, my company makes many high precision parts for numerous aerospace and electronics companies...all we do is make the parts to the customer's specifications, period. A manufacturer does not design the parts, they merely machine and assemble things to their client's detailed specifications, including exact materials and measurements as provided through 3D CAD files and engineering drawings.

 

The lenses are "Leica lenses" regardless of where they are made or by who.

 

That depends - when we say "Leica lens" do we mean the technical standard we've seen on later M- or S-lenses? This standard was not only achieved by design but also the ability to manufacture and assemble it. This takes specific know-how they never outsourced -> external suppliers are unable to manufacture. They could make or assemble some elements but not all. Then you have to pay an additional margin for the supplier and what's possible within these restrictions is then called "a true Leica lens"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that the T lenses are made in Japan should be seen as a positive. Buyers are unlikely to suffer the quality issues which buyers of M lenses seem to put up with (upside down aperture rings, loose elements, internal scratches etc. etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact that the T lenses are made in Japan should be seen as a positive. Buyers are unlikely to suffer the quality issues which buyers of M lenses seem to put up with (upside down aperture rings, loose elements, internal scratches etc. etc.)

 

And please quote the actual incidence of these alleged shortcomings as % of total production … and compare it to same for Japanese production.

 

So that we have an unbiased objective comparison.

 

dunk

Edited by dkpeterborough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And please quote the actual incidence of these alleged shortcomings as % of total production … and compare it to same for Japanese production.

 

So that we have an unbiased objective comparison.

 

dunk

 

 

In order to have an unbiased objective comparison, we need access to restricted/controlled information. It's unlikely we'll have this access.

Unbiased and objectively we can compare the what Leica charges for lenses and what the Japanese manufacturers charge. With the premium Leica commands, there is an expectation of much more stringent quality control. So when lenses ship with absurd faults (incorrectly oriented aperture rings, internal scratches, etc.), the experience is much more jarring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the T body is made in Germany and all the rest of is not.

 

WTF? Has Leica turned into a commodity packager?

 

 

 

 

Sent from my Etcha-sketch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In order to have an unbiased objective comparison, we need access to restricted/controlled information. It's unlikely we'll have this access.

Unbiased and objectively we can compare the what Leica charges for lenses and what the Japanese manufacturers charge. With the premium Leica commands, there is an expectation of much more stringent quality control. So when lenses ship with absurd faults (incorrectly oriented aperture rings, internal scratches, etc.), the experience is much more jarring.

 

Not to mention the fact that you get a nice little hand signed card from the Leica gnome who has thoroughly inspected your new lens or camera several times before it leaves the factory! And yet they still let very obviously faulty goods out the door.

Edited by earleygallery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That doesn't really speak to Leica's quality control if that was the intended target of your barb.

 

Give an M a good bang on a table, roll it down a hillside or ship it via UPS and the rangefinder can be way off. Though for many it's the raison d'être for the existence of the M series, it is its weakest link in terms of delicacy. Shipping can occasionally be a hazardous thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy