New Leica M lenses Not made in Germany!

Budget-wise, I may start my Leica set with Zeiss lenses. Even the Summarits are too pricey for me. If I trade these lenses, I won't get as much value back because of the lack of the "Leica" name.

I refuse to be a "collector", Cameras and lenses were meant to be used. Any idea about a release date for the Summarits? I am looking forward to seeing some images from these lenses.
 
Freakscene said:
>Elements have always been ground in Germany or Canada.

Leica have sourced their aspherical elements from Hoya for all asph lenses (after the 35/1.4 aspherical the original one with two aspherical elements) and they are hot pressed, not ground.
Marty
Click to expand...

Maybe it's the polishing part they do in Germany. I seem to remember someone from the LUG talking about the polishing room they visited on a tour of the factory, where they were making elements for the 35 Lux ASPH.
 
Last edited:
Oddly enough yesterday my local dealer told me on super double secret terms the same story, when I picked up my M7 from being serviced. He even went as far as saying outright that they were made by Cosina for Leica, like the Zeiss lenses.

Again, I don't really care as long as they perform as Leica intended them to. They have done this in the past with two of the newer R zooms (4/35-70 and 4/70-200) and they perform spectacularly.

Leica needs to lower their prices, without compromising performance or they are not going to be able to compete and will go belly up. The new owners and the M8 saved their a$$ in a nick of time. 99% of companies do not survive such a close call as Leica had. They were very, very lucky.

The world has changed and the old days are gone. Leica can't compete or survive with a 50 year old production model.
 
Leica hasen't made their own glass for along time (20+ years). they buy "melts" made to their specification from other manufacturers (Schott, Hoya etc). Unless you have a large production it is not worth while doing it. Cosina has their own glass plant, but only a fraction of the glass they make goes into the CV/Zeiss lenses, The rest goes into the production of high speed surveillance lenses and LCD projection lenses. A fair amount of the optical glass is sold to other camera manufacturers.
In todays world it makes complete sense to "out source" to manufacturing facilities that are specialized. Leica is slowly learning that inventing the wheel every time they start doing something is not economically feasible any more.
Where Leica will be saving money is in the mechanics of the Summarit lens line. They are using a "common" barrel and just shorten or lengthen it to fit the focal length. This is of course what CV did years ago with the 15/21/25/28 mm range and currently is doing with the ZM lens-line.
We should not forget that the mechanics of a lens (glass inciuded) probably account for only 50% of the cost. The rest is assembly and centering of the elements (the centering cost can be as high as 40% of the cost of a premium lens). With a f2.5 this is still important, but with super speed lenses it is critical. You can have the best glass in the world and the most well machined mechanics and a improperly centered lens will only be mediocre at best.
As for where the lenses are made - that is of no significance as long as the QC is up to snuff. Leica was quite late in going to Computer Numerically Controlled machining and this is the standard today. With the proper set up and training of the operator, you can produce glass and helicoils that was impossible before. The tolerances can be held much closer and consistent.
Hand assembly meant that lens elements were sorted in +/- boxes and the elements were then assembled so that a + lens element was matched with a - element to compensate. The tolerances were quite wide (around 5-8% +/-) and todays machines will do much better than that!
Germany might be a high cost production country, but Japan is not much cheaper today. Much of the parts for all camera manufacturers are farmed out, China/Taiwan/Vietnam can outbid any of the high cost producers.
As for differences in Made in Canada and Made in Germany lenses is pure BS! Most of the classic Leica lenses were designed and made in Canada and some of the so called Made in Germany lenses had barrels and/or helicoils made in Germany and the optical cells were shipped from Canada. Why do you think that most of the advertising shots from the 60/70/80's had the Summilux 50/1,4 on the M-body. It was virtually the only M-lens made in Germany for decades!
The Summarit line will offer Leica a set of lenses that, though more expensive than the CV/Zeiss offerings, will allow them some chance of making inroads in the reasonably priced lens offerings. I also trust Leica in that they will not make a lens that would not be comparable to what other makers are offering. They have been in this industry for a long, long time and when they set their mind to it, they can do spectacular things (50/1,4 ASPH/75f2 etc). Now. lets see what they can do in an affordable lens line!
 
Windwalker57 said:
The only reason I would want the Made in Germany stamp on these new lenses is to maintain value as a used item. I have seen lenses and cameras stamped Made in Canada go for a lot less than a German equivalent. Over the years, I have heard that the "German" stuff is better than the "Canada" stuff, yet I have never seen proof.
Click to expand...

The Singapore made Rolleiflex 35mm SLR cameras have much worse quaility control problems than their German counterparts. Accordingly, the made in Germany Rolleis cost more these days. My German made Rollei SLR does not function but my Singapore made Rollei does. Oh well. There goes my theory! :D
 
Tom A said:
We should not forget that the mechanics of a lens (glass inciuded) probably account for only 50% of the cost. The rest is assembly and centering of the elements (the centering cost can be as high as 40% of the cost of a premium lens). With a f2.5 this is still important, but with super speed lenses it is critical. You can have the best glass in the world and the most well machined mechanics and a improperly centered lens will only be mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

Very interesting. I had no idea that centering could eat up so much of the cost of a lens.

HL
 
raid said:
The Singapore made Rolleiflex 35mm SLR cameras have much worse quaility control problems than their German counterparts. Accordingly, the made in Germany Rolleis cost more these days. My German made Rollei SLR does not function but my Singapore made Rollei does. Oh well. There goes my theory! :D
Click to expand...
The Singapore made Rollei 35 scale focus cameras are generally thought to be just as good as the German ones, although the German ones are worth more to collectors. I had one of each nationality and could tell no difference in fit, finish, and performance.

Richard
 
I can't help wondering if the original comment on Leica lenses coming from China might not refer to the Leica-badged optics that turn up on Panasonic's digital cameras?
 
Frankly, unless the person is cited by name and/or position, all of this B.S. citing "well known" or "inside" sources must stop. Otherwise, it's just an unsubstantiated rumor.

The Singapore-made cameras and lenses for Rollei don't show the same level of quality as those made in Germany. Mechanical quality is variable, which I have experienced first-hand. Optical quality is excellent.

With the Singapore-made Rollei 35, one of the key metal parts in the film advance was replaced with a plastic gear, which often stripped. At some point, Rollei reverted to the metal gear.
 
Last edited:
I hadn't heard it but to me it makes perfect sense. At least more sense then doing it themselves at high costs. The optics industry in China (or Japan) is as good as anywhere else, so why not use a reputable factory with stiff QC? Leica should have gone that way a decade or two ago.
 
Leica started going that way with Minolta on the CL years ago, but never took it any further.

Then they had compacts made by Panasonic more recently. My Minilux is superb and the Summarit lens has got a great reputation.
 
This is just the same as the Scotch whisky distillers - they buy most of their raw materials (malt in particular) from a common source. Very few distilleries run their own maltings anymore. A few of them have unique water supplies (Glenlivet & Ardbeg spring to mind) but with all luxury goods the value is in the heritage more than anything else.
 
Ara, I think the use of the term Asian in place of orient or oriental would be more appropriate.

As far as your offering a personal opinion, you are of course entitled. That said, I doubt you have dealt with all Asian companies and any generality lumping them all together under one statement I think you will agree in retrospect is inappropriate. There are good and bad manufacturers in the US, in Germany..... and in the Asian countries.

Now, I don't think anyone would feel it appropriate that I censor any of the remarks here and so I have not. That said, expressing any bias such as racism is not acceptable. I will accept Ara's words that he does not intend his comment to be racist, but I do think that not mentioning racism at all would have been the best action. At best this thread in general has strayed and skewed towards a regional economic bias against Asian made products.

Let's all just use thought before click the Post Reply button here to make sure this does not go any farther astray.

Thank you
 
Please... just close this thread now; there are too many here who won't be able to help themselves.

The fact of the matter is the price point of these lenses is still so far out of the realm of reality for many of us that it's pointless to argue the origin of mfg. WHO CARES :bang: :bang:
 
I think that there's a lot of good stuff in this thread.

Most people are saying that the origin of the lens does not matter to them so long as it's good quality.

There is just one post criticizing standards in the region, and no indication that others may follow. Surely not a reason to lock the thread?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom