Digital Leica Glass

[wilfredo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just wondering who's really making the new Leica digital lenses??? Panasonic? Japan?

 

Cheers,

Wilfredo+

Benitez-Rivera Photography

[Advertisement]

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

[marknorton]

Do you mean the Digilux 3 lenses - I think it's Pansonic, in Japan, yes.

[ho_co]

And who knows who produces them for Panasonic?

 

Designs and performance are approved by Leica. Early on there was a comment by the head of Panasonic that for a while they had some difficulty meeting Leica's requirements.

 

--HC

[Bob Ross]

And who knows who produces them for Panasonic?

 

Designs and performance are approved by Leica. Early on there was a comment by the head of Panasonic that for a while they had some difficulty meeting Leica's requirements.

 

--HC

Hi HC,

Panasonic does have its own lens fabrication facilities with quality standards set up by Leica. The more interesting question is, since Panasonic is one of the world's leaders in aspherical elements, with a separate facility to make them, does Leica get the aspherical elements from them (as do other mfrs)? I have also read that Leica has a lens operation in Japan and it was toured by someone from F2 (I couldn't find the source article for that). A friend of mine toured Panasonic's aspheric lens facility and he said that I'd be surprised by where the elements end up (no specifics given). The way that I picture this is that a mfr. gives Panasonic an optical glass blank (their own formula) with specs, Panasonic makes the element and sends it back to the mfr. for final polishing, coating and installation in final product.

Bob

[ho_co]

Bob--

A fair amount of Panasonic's lens production is also done in China. (see digitalkamera.de: Besuch im Pearl River Delta, dem "Optical Silicon Valley" Chinas, one of a series in German)

 

The author points out what has long been the case with Leica and others--wherever the head offices of the company may be, there are many sources for its products. The quality demands are of course set by the company whose name goes on the product.

 

I don't agree with the logic behind some of the author's conclusions, but I was interested to learn of this "Chinese lens stew."

 

--HC

[sdai]

And who knows who produces them for Panasonic?

 

Designs and performance are approved by Leica. Early on there was a comment by the head of Panasonic that for a while they had some difficulty meeting Leica's requirements.

 

--HC

 

 

In fact, there were several interviews in Asahi Kamera, Nippon Kamera and DCM where Panasonic engineers clearly indicated that these lenses were designed and built by themselves ... and finally assembly was done in their own factory in Japan.

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In fact, there were several interviews in Asahi Kamera, Nippon Kamera and DCM where Panasonic engineers clearly indicated that these lenses were designed and built by themselves ... and finally assembly was done in their own factory in Japan.

Simon--

As the digitalkamera.de article says, everyone is in bed together. When you say 'final assembly was done [by Panasonic] in Japan,' I don't doubt it. As you saw in the article, some feel that Canon is also in the mix.

 

Do you have any links to these interviews? It's a topic that interests me.

 

--HC

[sdai]

Do you have any links to these interviews? It's a topic that interests me.

 

Howard, I believe that Canon has nothing to do with the Panasonic/Leica deal and none of the interviews has mentioned Canon at all ... I've worked in Japan for many years and am a long time subscriber of the aforementioned magazines and still subscribe to them after I come back to North America. The Panasonic engineers have even mentioned the name of the factories which I can't recall precisely ... I'll try to find that if I have some time to check into the back issues. Cheers ...

[ho_co]

I believe that Canon has nothing to do with the Panasonic/Leica deal and none of the interviews has mentioned Canon at all ...

Simon--

I didn't express myself clearly. According to the article I mentioned, different manufacturers will buy the same lens from its source and label it differently.

 

I didn't mean to imply that Canon and Panasonic and Leica had an agreement to work together; but a lens designed by Panasonic to Leica spec and produced in China for final assembly in Japan might be marketed on a Canon as a Canon lens, on a Panasonic as a Leica lens, on an Epson as an Epson lens, on a Sony as a Zeiss lens etc.

 

As I said, some of the author's conclusions aren't warranted by the evidence he presents, but using the example of the lens on the Digilux 1, he speculates that it turns up on other brands as well.

 

I've simply got a curiosity about the "lens stew" but doubt trying to sniff much deeper has much purpose. There's no need to go researching your magazines, but it would be interesting nevertheless to fill out the matter if you turn up any direct connections.

 

--HC

Picture 3.pdf

[sdai]

I don't think that's the case here ... Howard.

 

In fact, I just found the original articles published in the August issues of several Japanese magazines (as part of the L1 promo campaign), there were names of the Panasonic engineers who have worked on the "Leica" lenses, their titles, positions in the organization, their photographs in the interviews conducted in Q/A manner.

 

The "Leica" branded 4/3 lenses have most parts and sub-assemblies manufactured by Panasonic themselves and they mentioned factories in Kyushu, South Kadoma near Osaka etc.

 

It is true that Zeiss, Sony, Tamron, Canon, Nikon and Olympus all source from Chinese manufacturers, all of them also have their own facilities in China ... I know exactly where the factories are and their names, contact numbers, etc. ...

 

But not the Panasonic ...

[ho_co]

Simon--

You may be right. Certainly Panasonic does a lot of their own lens design and manufacture.

 

I know only that the article I cited disagrees. I would be very interested if you could refute any part of it.

 

Naming engineers and factories involved is fine but irrelevant to my point, which was simply "Who knows who produces them for Panasonic?"

 

I'm sure everyone has subcontractors. Even you say that "most parts and subassemblies" are manufactured by Panasonic.

 

I'm not arguing with your take on the matter, but I don't think you have engaged yourself with the point made by digitalkamera.de. I'll doublecheck the article to be sure I'm not off on a wild hare!

 

Respectfully,

--HC

[Bob Ross]

Hi HC,

For a few more hints, one Annual Report meeting at Oly, had them going on about making lens barrels (the translation for completed lenses) for themselve and others. My guess is that firms with expensive lens assembly an testing equipmant will do work for others, just like aspheric lens making equipment is rare and expensive and maybe proprietory.

There is an unusual correlation between Tamron and Nikon on some zooms. Another source said that most optical glass blanks in Japan came from Minolta. I wonder what happened in the Sony deal and shift to China.

Lens designs are in catalogs, so they can be tapped when needed and I guess the designer gets the credit & royalties. This sort of explains why so many of the digicam lenses seemed to be cloned across brands. The Asian lens mill with its high profit, must be tempting to Leica and others for the consumer level products.

Bob

[wilfredo]

This is all very interesting. Makes one really wonder about the Leica product. Did I understand correctly that the ASPH lens elements used by Leica may in fact be manufactured by Panasonic??? Would this also apply to primes???? If that is the case, what justifies the cost?

 

Wilfredo+

Benitez-Rivera Photography

[sdai]

Did I understand correctly that the ASPH lens elements used by Leica may in fact be manufactured by Panasonic??? Would this also apply to primes???? If that is the case, what justifies the cost?

 

I'm quite positive that the aspherical elements used in genuine Leica lenses are molded, ground, polished in Germany by Leica itself. Erwin Puts has clear descriptions on the techniques Leica has adopted in the process in his book "Leica Lens Conpendium" ... I think there were Hoya and Schott involved.

[ho_co]

Did I understand correctly that the ASPH lens elements used by Leica may in fact be manufactured by Panasonic???

No. Panasonic is directly related to the Leica-branded lenses that appear on Panasonic cameras only, so far as I know.

 

Makes one really wonder about the Leica product. Did I understand correctly that the ASPH lens elements used by Leica may in fact be manufactured by Panasonic??? Would this also apply to primes???? If that is the case, what justifies the cost?

If you look at Canon's and Nikon's best lenses, they are in the same price range as Leica's lenses. The fact is that to use the best designs and the proper glasses costs more no matter where they are built. Leica is a tiny company, but they do almost all production of their lenses themselves. As Simon said, there aren't many companies left that make their own glass, so most manufacturers buy the glass from the same sources.

 

Take an example: The 40/2 Leitz Summmicron for the Leica CL was made in Germany; the camera was made by Minolta in Japan. As part of the deal, Leica gave the formula for the lens to Minolta for them to distribute under their own name in Japan. But one element was quite expensive and Minolta used another glass that 'wasn't quite' the same when they built the 40/2 Rokkor. At f/8 they both make the same picture. Open them up to f/4 and wider and you see why the Leica lens costs more.

 

 

 

So to repeat what Simon said, most Leica primes and their zooms are made in Germany. But the reason they're so expensive is the design, expertise and assembly standards.

 

In other words: Shoot it. Then see if you can find something else that takes the same picture; that is seldom possible. Once you find out that it is better, the question of why it's more expensive disappears.

 

--HC

[ho_co]

Hi HC,

For a few more hints, one Annual Report meeting at Oly, had them going on about making lens barrels (the translation for completed lenses) for themselve and others. My guess is that firms with expensive lens assembly an testing equipmant will do work for others, just like aspheric lens making equipment is rare and expensive and maybe proprietory.

There is an unusual correlation between Tamron and Nikon on some zooms. Another source said that most optical glass blanks in Japan came from Minolta. I wonder what happened in the Sony deal and shift to China.

Lens designs are in catalogs, so they can be tapped when needed and I guess the designer gets the credit & royalties. This sort of explains why so many of the digicam lenses seemed to be cloned across brands. The Asian lens mill with its high profit, must be tempting to Leica and others for the consumer level products.

Bob

Thanks, Bob!

 

That ties in directly with the article I've mentioned several times. It's accurate but incomplete to say that "Panasonic makes these lenses." For example, they don't have their own glass lab, so they have to buy glass. And like all good businesses in the mass production market, if they find a way to get the lens produced less expensively by outsourcing, they would be crazy not to do it.

 

There's another point though. The PDF I posted above is a list of what is apparently the identical lens used by various manufacturers.The author of the article, Wilfried Bittner, points out that all the companies listed there had a lens that looked the same on their various bodies and had the same specification, viz 7 - 21 mm f/2,0 - 2,5. But here comes the interesting part. At the time the Digilux 1 came out with this lens, you heard on this forum and at many other places that the lens was actually a Canon design.Then one user on the old Leica forum posted two pictures, one from the Canon and one from the Digilux. There was a noticeable difference, the Leica/Panasonic one being clearly superior. I got to see them before they were removed from the site. So this ties in with what I mentioned to Wilfredo: EVEN IF the lens was DESIGNED by Canon, it had to be PRODUCED to much higher standards to earn the Leica brand.

 

Bittner says he believes that Canon designed the lens, but his logic doesn't hold up in my opinion.

 

And one more thing: There was a citation on the old Leica forum where Panasonic discussed trying to meet Leica's specs. I never saw it on the Panasonic site, but it is quoted at Leica User Forum - Welcome!.

 

Oh drat! I just tried it and that URL no longer works. Maybe Andreas or a moderator can give us a clear link...

 

It's a very complicated question. It's interesting the way tracing your ancestors is interesting. But in the end, if Leica puts a red dot on it, that means it's extremely good, and it will cost more.

 

Now down from my horse!

 

--HC

[marknorton]

Lens designers talk about "tolerance margin" which defines how off from "perfect" your fabrication process can be and still deliver a lens that performs within specification.

 

Leica's fabrication process is extremely precise, highly labour intensive and their designs use expensive materials. For example, the cost of the third lens in from the front of the 50mm f1.4 ASPH costs more than all the rest of the lens elements put together.

 

Leica no longer make their own glass and, in the same way that they don't make their own sensors or electronics, they buy in from specialist vendors. Leica are at the top of the food chain in that they produce finished products instead of parts for those products.

[albertwang]

Cannon building Leica lenses? Wow, that's a new revelation to moi...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[andybarton]

IIRC, the Panasonic LC5, the Digilux 1 and the contemporary Canon offering in the same market all had lenses sourced from the same place.

[stunsworth]

Andy, that's my recollection too. At the end of the day does it really matter? Isn't it the quality of the glass that matters not who makes it?