Why no TL-lenses from independent vendors?

[MediaFotografie]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...I wonder why there are no lenses for T(L)-mount from independent vendors like Zeiss, Sigma or Tamron.

 

Any ideas? Legal reasons?

[ramarren]

Niche camera by a niche camera maker with not enough made or in use to make it profitable.

 

 

That's one consideration.

 

The other is that the alternative vendors like Zeiss, Sigma, and Tamron would be competing with Leica to produce lenses, and probably would not like the image of being "second string" producers attached to their lens products ... the assumption here being that the majority of Leica owners buy Leica due to the reputation of their lenses. They'd have to produce something significantly better, and cheaper at the same time, to have a positive image to market with.

[Advertisement]

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

[MediaFotografie]

last year Zeiss showed us an interessting Distagon 35/1,4 with M-mount; they have a lot of fine lenses (not only Otus) which they could easily modify with TL-mount for both, SL und T. It will need some years until Leica had a good portfolio of own lenses - so why nobody do this?

 

(I suppose they aren't allowed to use TL-mount)

[ramarren]

last year Zeiss showed us an interessting Distagon 35/1,4 with M-mount; they have a lot of fine lenses (not only Otus) which they could easily modify with TL-mount for both, SL und T. It will need some years until Leica had a good portfolio of own lenses - so why nobody do this?

 

(I suppose they aren't allowed to use TL-mount)

 

I don't know about "easily", particularly if you want full electronic interface and data exchange ... even without AF. 

 

While the basic mount flange for TL mount is already being offered by makers of adapters (Novoflex and others), no one but Leica is producing smart adapters that interface with the T and SL cameras' electronics yet. Those protocol specifics are probably not available. If I were spending Zeiss Otus prices for a lens for my SL, in the TL mount, I'd expect it to be a fully implemented mount. Otherwise, there's no advantage to buying that over buying the M-mount version and using it with Leica's M Adapter TL, and buying the lens in M-mount means it is more versatile (can be used on a range of other cameras that accept M-mount lenses). 

[MediaFotografie]

I don't know about "easily", particularly if you want full electronic interface and data exchange ... even without AF. 

 

While the basic mount flange for TL mount is already being offered by makers of adapters (Novoflex and others), no one but Leica is producing smart adapters that interface with the T and SL cameras' electronics yet. Those protocol specifics are probably not available. If I were spending Zeiss Otus prices for a lens for my SL, in the TL mount, I'd expect it to be a fully implemented mount. Otherwise, there's no advantage to buying that over buying the M-mount version and using it with Leica's M Adapter TL, and buying the lens in M-mount means it is more versatile (can be used on a range of other cameras that accept M-mount lenses). 

 

good points! 

 

We will see what happens here; some independent lenses would be good for Leica too, but you may right: small market, and all the other points. Anyway, we can use adapters.

[earleygallery]

Niche camera by a niche camera maker with not enough made or in use to make it profitable.

 

I think this is the correct answer. Simple economics.

[Jared]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think it's a combination of a few factors. First, there just aren't enough TL and SL bodies out there to justify the R&D costs for a third party. Second, people who spend Leica type money on a body tend not to want Sigma or Tamron or Tokina glass, farther reducing the pool of note trial customers. Third, it might be hard to make the lenses work well since, in the modern era of EVF cameras, some lens optical issues are corrected in the camera with software (distortion, cig netting, etc.), and that would likely require cooperation from Leica that they might not be inclined to provide.

[Jared]

Damn auto correct. That was supposed to be "vignetting" not "cig netting".

[ramarren]

Regards the software correction, lenses that don't require software correction can certainly be designed and used. But it's pretty simple anyway: all it takes is that Leica is willing to license the mount protocol specification to a lens provider. That's required to produce a full function lens anyway, the specification will include the list of lens correction parameters delivered to the body by the lens' firmware. 

 

The size of the audience is certainly the biggest factor; projects like this are constrained by the amount of revenue it takes to develop a successful product vs how much profit they might return.