LEICA VARIO-ELMARIT-SL 24–70mm f/2.8 ASPH

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, Michael Markey said:

It seems to me that there is a need for greater transparency in order that the consumer can make proper decisions rather than this veil of misinformation and misunderstanding surrounding these items.

A friend recently bought a Panasonic lens under the misunderstanding that it was made by Leica for Panasonic because Leica was mentioned on the barrel.

I thought consumer protection legislation had put an end to this sort of obfuscation .

I think that there have been plenty of widely published instances where Leica and Panasonic explained the process. Your friend missed out on due diligence. 

[BernardC]

14 minutes ago, AZach said:

Not quite if zooming ring will turn counter-clockwise. Will not even consider this version as also quite happy with the current 24-90 SL.

Yes, this zoom won't appeal much to people who already use the 24-90. It seems to be intended as an upsell for people who are considering the Panasonic or Sigma 24-70. More choice is good, to a certain extent.

[Advertisement]

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

[Michael Markey]

11 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I think that there have been plenty of widely published instances where Leica and Panasonic explained the process. Your friend missed out on due diligence. 

Quite possibly but it would be interesting to see that tested .

I think if you put a manufacturers name on a product it would be construed as a reasonable assumption (the key word there being reasonable) to conclude that they had a role in the making of that product.

It`s all about transparency .

It would be interesting to see these procedures tested .

Edited May 4, 2021 by Michael Markey

[LD_50]

6 hours ago, Michael Markey said:

It seems to me that there is a need for greater transparency in order that the consumer can make proper decisions rather than this veil of misinformation and misunderstanding surrounding these items.

A friend recently bought a Panasonic lens under the misunderstanding that it was made by Leica for Panasonic because Leica was mentioned on the barrel.

I thought consumer protection legislation had put an end to this sort of obfuscation .

That friend should not need legislation to understand a Panasonic lens should be considered a Panasonic lens. I assume you’re referring to the S pro lenses that are “certified by Leica.” I can’t see what’s confusing about that. Even if Leica built the lens, it would still be branded Panasonic and carry the value of that branding. 

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, Michael Markey said:

Quite possibly but it would be interesting to see that tested .

I think if you put a manufacturers name on a product it would be construed as a reasonable assumption (the key word there being reasonable) to conclude that they had a role in the making of that product.

It`s all about transparency .

It would be interesting to see these procedures tested .

Your friend might have noticed that the lens is marked "Made in Japan".  Leica has no lens production facilities in Japan. Leica lenses for the TL system are not made by Leica (in Japan, but not by Panasonic), but are still Leica lenses. And yes, Leica had a role in the design process of Panaleica lenses. Otherwise they would not have certified it. Which hands ultimately put the product together is utterly irrelevant.

[nicci78]

So we have now real Leica lenses made in Germany. 
less real one made in Japan. 
Some Panasonic lenses co-branded as Leica DG. 
Some Lumix S Pro certified by Leica. 
And now a Sigma rehoused as a Leica optic. 
 

What a mess. 😩

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Really? What is important? The images a lens produces or the brand or the place where is was made? Let's  not descend into irrelevancies.

[nicci78]

It is totally relevant. 
Some people still think that they bought legitimate Leica lenses in the form of m4/3 Panasonic Leica DG ones. 
 

Is a Nocticron 45mm a Leica ? A Panasonic ? Definitely a Panasonic with a hint of Leica design. 
But it is nothing alike a real Leica. 
 

Isn’t that weird to have to say real Leica in order to talk about the made in Germany one ?

Can you imagine such thing happening with Hermès. This is a real Hermés made in France. But this one is just a sticker on this Chinese co branded bag. 
Or image a real Rolex and another cheaper cobranded Swatch Rolex. 
Crazy right ? 

Really nobody did what Leica is doing. It is diluting its brand strength. 

[jaapv]

Baloney. Leica has used outside manufacturers for more than half a century. When I buy a lens I buy a tool, not a fetish.

[Michael Markey]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Your friend might have noticed that the lens is marked "Made in Japan".  Leica has no lens production facilities in Japan. Leica lenses for the TL system are not made by Leica (in Japan, but not by Panasonic), but are still Leica lenses. And yes, Leica had a role in the design process of Panaleica lenses. Otherwise they would not have certified it. Which hands ultimately put the product together is utterly irrelevant.

You make a good point however lets remember that consumer legislation is drafted in favour of the consumer .

I`m still minded to regard the situation as ,at best, unclear and at worst misleading .

What we need to decide is can the consumer be reasonably expected to come to a conclusion as to who has made the goods he is buying especially  when one of the potential manufacturers is charging a premium for their suggested involvement .

Its important because that same manufacturer puts its manufacturing expertise ,place of manufacture , brand as well as its quality control at the heart of its marketing strategy .

It makes it clear in the advertising literature that ,that is what you are paying for therebye  elevating it to much more than an irrelevancy  .

It can`t be important in one context but no longer so when it becomes inconvenient .

 

 

Edited May 4, 2021 by Michael Markey

[jaapv]

As far as I am aware consumer law protects against faulty products, not against overblown expectations which do not affect the product performance.

[Michael Markey]

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

As far as I am aware consumer law protects against faulty products, not against overblown expectations which do not affect the product performance.

That was its original intention but with the rise of internet sales with people buying goods which they`ve not actually seen and handled the emphasis has changed.

Suddenly how you describe a product has taken on greater significance .

It`s even affected horse sales where ,as you can imagine, claims were often more wishful thinking to say the least .  

[Hazesus]

In a business sense this 24-70 will do a lot of good to Leica just like the Leica Q when it first came out it brought in new customers. This 24-70 lens is the gate way for new customers to their product lines. Leica can't make them selfs look bad on May 6 knowing theirs other lenses in the market that people will do a comparison on YouTube.  

Edited May 4, 2021 by Hazesus

[jaapv]

11 minutes ago, Michael Markey said:

That was its original intention but with the rise of internet sales with people buying goods which they`ve not actually seen and handled the emphasis has changed.

Suddenly how you describe a product has taken on greater significance .

It`s even affected horse sales where ,as you can imagine, claims were often more wishful thinking to say the least .  

He bought a lens that was advertised as a Panasonic lens that was designed in cooperation with Leica and is built to norms set by Leica - and that is exactly what he got.

[hansvons]

25 minutes ago, Hazesus said:

This 24-70 lens is the gate way for new customers to their product lines.

Absolutely. I own the 24-90. And while it's a gem of a lens, it's prohibitively expensive for many advanced prosumers, which are probably the leading target group of the SL-line. The SL2-S, together with the 3k 24-70, will be a 7.5k or even lower package.  That can be a viable option for anyone who wants to enter the Leica universe without much compromise.

 

33 minutes ago, Hazesus said:

Leica can't make them selfs look bad on May 6 knowing theirs other lenses in the market that people will do a comparison on YouTube.  

Many YouTube pundits with their lens tests are the plague. More than often, it's all about price tags and specs. But that's precisely what Leica is not about and other great products in the world neither. They are meant to inspire and not to function under the bleak regiment of price-performance ratios. 

The whole of YouTube will pounce on the lens like vultures. It's going to be a massacre. Just read this thread.

[setuporg]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

When I buy a lens I buy a tool, not a fetish.

What’s wrong with both?:)

Edited May 5, 2021 by setuporg

[setuporg]

It would be more interesting if it were a small, light, native and excellent 28-70.

Edited May 5, 2021 by setuporg

[Jk1002]

I am surprised nobody catches that the Sigma is not weather proof. 
I would not expect them to take that forward in conjunction with their pro bodies so besides tighter tolerances on the glas, few tweaks and the Leica price stability plus Brand cachet I think they make this probably a hit with the kits and people heavily invested in primes.

Am a bit disappointed though I was hoping for a true alternative to the 24-90 but lets see what they put on the table.

 

[Hazesus]

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[setuporg]

Is it internal focusing or excited donkey like Sigma?