Leica T performs digital lens correction , a claim by dpreview.com

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Same for Kyocera?

 

Don't know about Kyocera, but we all know of Schneider, Minolta, Sigma as lens manufacturers for Leica, if not glass manufacturers.

[AlanG]

 

I still do not see the problem as in the end the result is the decisive factor regardless if it is achieved by hard- or software.

 

If you don't care about cost then it doesn't matter. If you do care about cost you might want to determine if the T lenses are providing sufficient image improvement over the competition to justify the price. So we'll have to see what objective tests turn up.

 

Even if Leica had claimed the lens was well corrected optically, it still could be improved via software.

Edited May 4, 2014 by AlanG

[Advertisement]

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

[rramesh]

I heard that the T lenses are manufactured in Japan by Instagram*

 

 

Pete.

*Yes, I'm gently pulling your leg.

 

That would have been true if the T deliveries were to have been like those of the M. Only fleeting images for a long time.

[jaapv]

Same for Kyocera?

Yes -they built complete cameras for Leica, like the Minizoom, including the lens.

 

 

The main reason why Leica lenses are expensive is because they're Hand Made in Germany

 

There is hardly any difference in labor cost between Japan and Germany. They would cost exactly the same if handmade in Japan.

 

If you don't care about cost then it doesn't matter. If you do care about cost you might want to determine if the T lenses are providing sufficient image improvement over the competition to justify the price. So we'll have to see what objective tests turn up.

 

Even if Leica had claimed the lens was well corrected optically, it still could be improved via software.

What competition? I am not aware of any other brand lenses suited to the T-mount with full functionality.

Edited May 4, 2014 by jaapv

[AlanG]

 

What competition? I am not aware of any other brand lenses suited to the T-mount with full functionality.

 

I am talking about lens and camera as a package. Could you justify buying a T lens for that body if the image is no better than what is produced from a much less expensive system? Hypothetical question at this point, so we assume it is better.

 

Oh yes, you could of course... but not everybody owns 1,000 cameras.

 

What I said was those who do care, will have to wait until it is tested. If the T lenses are not much better than what other brands offer, is the T still a very compelling choice for very many?

Edited May 4, 2014 by AlanG

[jaapv]

The eternal question for any Leica lens/system. If the answer were not positive in our perception -and in the end nothing else counts- we would not be here posing it.

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Childish white lies that were bound to be revealed sooner or later. Leica DID, on several occasions (interviews) claim "only optical correction" of T-lenses. Personally I don't give a damn WHAT correction they apply as long as the lenses perform well! See X Vario! But I DO mind when somebody tries to sell me a pack of lies.... What world they (Leica) are living in? Virtual? Shame....

Can anyone link to these statements in interviews???

 

Are you really being serious about a pack of lies and shame

[AlanG]

 

There is hardly any difference in labor cost between Japan and Germany. They would cost exactly the same if handmade in Japan.

 

Assuming the Japanese manufacturer does not have greater efficiencies or lower overhead there can still be a big difference between manufacturing cost and the selling price. (e.g. markup.)

 

I bet the T lenses have a higher profit margin than would an identical lens sold under another brand name. You just have to look at what Leica charges for an Olympus EVF to see this.

[jaapv]

Can anyone link to these statements in interviews???

 

Are you really being serious about a pack of lies and shame

I feel presenting allegations without laying a foundation in demonstrable fact and then mounting an attack based on these allegations is yellow-press journalism of the worst kind. I am surprised DPReview appears to indulge in it. My position is put up or shut up - or rather apologize.

[jaapv]

Assuming the Japanese manufacturer does not have greater efficiencies or lower overhead there can still be a big difference between manufacturing cost and the selling price. (e.g. markup.)

 

I bet the T lenses have a higher profit margin than would an identical lens sold under another brand name. You just have to look at what Leica charges for an Olympus EVF to see this.

Even the EVF is doubtful. Sure - a huge -and on the face of- it inexplicable price difference for the same thing. Leica and Olympus clearly used the same Chinese manufacturer. But do we know the price they were charged? It is not unthinkable that Olympus was able to negotiate a considerably better price than Leica by ordering a far larger number.

Until we know the cost of procurement we cannot know the markup.

[AlanG]

Even the EVF is doubtful. Sure - a huge -and on the face of- it inexplicable price difference for the same thing. Leica and Olympus clearly used the same Chinese manufacturer. But do we know the price they were charged? It is not unthinkable that Olympus was able to negotiate a considerably better price than Leica by ordering a far larger number.

Until we know the cost of procurement we cannot know the markup.

 

Yes you don't know that wholesale cost or even what the dealer pays for either item do you? Well Leica could buy them at retail price, mark them up 50% and still sell for less than the Leica one. $279 + $140 = $419. Whereas Leica charges $499 (B&H prices.) I wouldn't think printing the name Leica on a plate for it would cost much.

[diogenis]

If you don't care about cost then it doesn't matter. If you do care about cost you might want to determine if the T lenses are providing sufficient image improvement over the competition to justify the price. So we'll have to see what objective tests turn up.

 

Even if Leica had claimed the lens was well corrected optically, it still could be improved via software.

Since you do and we all do care about cost, what are your other options for filling that central gap of a leica T ?

 

We all tend to forget that this moto of the "least possible digital manipulation" was Leica's principle since the production of it's first digital M8.

fast forward one decade later and it appears that Leica was ineed right, since all manufacturers are now taking measures to reduce those filters.

Leica was sincere back then, and when they claim that their lenses are manufactured under strict specifications and very thorough grinding to optically correct images in the T, why should we not believe them? Have they ever failed you in giving bad cheap lenses? Are they not ahead the competition in that aera at least?

 

DPR got the publication that it needed, ok great article for clicks, but shame for DPR: You dont do it like this. Present the hard facts, and also publish the answer of Leica. Not like this.... Yellowzines.

[diogenis]

What I said was those who do care, will have to wait until it is tested. If the T lenses are not much better than what other brands offer, is the T still a very compelling choice for very many?

 

Is the iphone 5S still selling with a premium of more than 30% for Apple? If you do care for some $ then you will not dive into Apple's ecosystem and lose all it has to offer: originality, ease of use, stability accross the ecosystem, and more.

Same as for Leica if you value again those $ you will lose in ease of use, purity, quality.

Decision is yours to make.

[Guest DrPix]

Can anyone link to these statements in interviews???

 

Are you really being serious about a pack of lies and shame

 

Well, not really; just p....f a little. Once more Leica's Marketing bosses and Leica's Design/Development staff have not been talking to each other. Thanks God people that actually build/test the cameras know their job! As I said, I do not care about ANY corrections (digital/optical) as long as the lenses deliver! I love Leica and have been shooting entirely with Leica for many years now. These "ill-fated" claims ARE real but surely were not created by Leica's pro technicians; probably by some overeager advertisment-yuppies:) And I am absolutely certain that T-series shall be a huge commercial success - for the market it was intended!

[thighslapper]

The next new M lens will come with a software CD to correct its distortion and CA's. That will be fine too I guess?

 

Any correction represents issues with the lens performance. Some distortion is a fact of most WA or zoom lenses of course, but it's easier/cheaper to make a lens which performs below par and fix it with software. Couldn't happen with film only though.

 

Read Karbe's interview about the XV and the lens ...... with this size of sensor/format you run up against a brick wall of optical/physical problems that are impossible to solve without making the lens enormous ...... and you have plenty of them you can stick on the front of the T with an adapter if you want. I think you could throw twice as much money at the T and XV zooms ...... and just end up with a bigger lump of metal ...... and mimimal optical improvement in the ultimate image

[jmahto]

Let us know how that goes

 

My demand for quality gear at cheap price was a tongue-in-cheek comment. I should have added

[lct]

Yes -they built complete cameras for Leica, like the Minizoom, including the lens...

... and zoom lenses like the R 35-70/4 but did Leica disclose it themselves? This was my question.

[jaapv]

Yes - those products were marked “made in Japan” and the association with Kyocera was common knowledge. Come to think of it, Leica has always been completely open about this, except for the UV/IR filters (and even there they told us who it was not ), so there must be a reason.

[colonel]

Is the iphone 5S still selling with a premium of more than 30% for Apple? If you do care for some $ then you will not dive into Apple's ecosystem and lose all it has to offer: originality, ease of use, stability accross the ecosystem, and more.

Same as for Leica if you value again those $ you will lose in ease of use, purity, quality.

Decision is yours to make.

 

I think you will find windows phone better on originality, ease of use and stability

Android is better on all those things except ease of use

 

Apple grabs a lot of people due to build and price. So there is some similarity with Leica

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[M9reno]

DPReview is out there to get the clicks. Leica is out there to sell cameras. Leica sails close to the wind with some of its marketing claims, especially when it comes to associating its current digital products with Leitz/old-Leica's analogue glory-days: hence the statement on the T web page that T lenses are the product of a 150-year legacy of precision optics manufacture. The unwary reader immediately thinks of a T lens as the newest product of the same company that has been making microscopes since 1849, and some of the sharpest photo lenses since 1925. A T lens as the proud successor of Elmar and Summicron. Nice message.

 

Would this unwary reader realise that T lenses are not actually manufactured by Leica? Would he/she realise that their aberrations are of a different order than those of their M lens 'siblings', and unacceptable if not removed by software in-camera?

 

Dr Kaufmann's new, digital oriented Leica company sees a premium in its asociation with an analog legacy. Hence a move to Wetzlar, of all possible post-Solms destinations. Hence the ridiculous claim that a digital Leica is a "lifetime companion", not different from your grandfather's screwmount heirloom. They milk it for all it's worth. Sometimes, unsurprisingly, a little milk splashes on their face.

 

So they might never have denied software correction in print, or in interviews, but the message they keep sending is: tradition, tradition, tradition. And software correction, like many other digital realities, are treated whisperingly, as marketing inconveniences. DPReview are in business, too. Should they be blamed for taking advantage of Leica's rather artful construction of an analog marketing image?

Edited May 4, 2014 by M9reno
Clarification of point.