p.2 #1 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
catacore wrote:
I'm not so sure it is easier to just "do what you want" when it's about designing lenses and coming out with new products. While LLL does not HAVE to reproduce anything, they just CHOOSE to reverse enginner and copy the most sought after (or unobtanium) lenses without permision from the original owner, and make (big) money on that. This is theft, in my book. But it is exactly what these companies coming from a specific country they are all doing, for years: copying everything under the sun, then selling it at a lower price. Because the price of labour is low and because they invested nothing in R&D.
Disclaimer: I do have a LLL lens. Still think what they do is unethical big time....Show more →
I am not sure how you come to the unethical judgement on this. It is not like LLL are making rip off conterfits of original design like you see the the high end watch industry for example. They are clearly label with LLL markings, not the original producer's markings.
What LLL is doing is within the Worldwide Patent Laws which were designed to allow the originator of a design to solely profit from their work for a given time. It was correctly envisioned that after this time others would copy the design and offer these products at a reduced price.
This is no different than the generic drug industry, industrial equipment industry, high tech industry, auto industry, aerospace industry. It is the core principle guiding the concept of intellectual property rights from inception. LLL is doing this in the the correct and ethical way IP rights were designed for.
Nothing unethical in that.
Blaming an entire region, Country, and people is also a bit of a far step as well in my opinion.
p.2 #2 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
1bwana1 wrote:
Nothing unethical in that.
Not unethical and, most importantly, perfectly legal...if it weren’t, Leica would have already taken legal action against the company.
LLL is recreating classic optical designs from the past while also staying true to the barrel and mechanical design. If they were falsely branding their lenses with "LEICA" that would be an entirely different matter.
I personally see nothing unethical about it. In fact, their recreations often adhere more closely to the original designs than even Leica’s own reissued versions.
p.2 #4 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
I love my LLL 8e collapsible. I've gone through owning it twice before and always coming back. It's allowed me to own a Leica that is much more expensive and only available on the used market. If Leica was still manufacturing the lens, I'm sure the sentiment may be different, but they aren't. The laws are in place to prevent monopolization, like others have said, but at the same time to allow the creator to profit from the idea. Leica is losing no amount of money over what LLL is doing, and it doesn't even seem to be altering the used vintage Leica market much at all.
p.2 #5 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
Vintage flare (Canon 35/2 LTM for example) I love, but vintage glow (SR) i absolutely detest. Give me a lens that flares and doesn't have much or any glow, and if i want some glow I'll add a filter.
No way this $500 'Lux clone has zero distortion, prob won't even be "low" distortion. I don't think there's an affordable 35/1.4 out there, ever, with low distortion (and 35mm full frame coverage).
p.2 #6 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
I’d say, for those who dislike the 35/1.4 Lux glow, just get the CV 35/1.4 Nokton. It shares a similar rendering style without the glow, though it still has some SA.
p.2 #7 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
but as I've (and others too) mentioned in the past, I haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaate the CV chrome nose lol. I don't want to paint a lens just to tolerate using it.
p.2 #10 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
ISO1600 wrote:
but as I've (and others too) mentioned in the past, I haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaate the CV chrome nose lol. I don't want to paint a lens just to tolerate using it.
If you use the lens hood it hides the chrome nose.
p.2 #13 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
Fred Miranda wrote:
What? I missed that.
Missed opportunity - surprised they did not name it SIMMILUX. or NOSUMMILUX since they name their 60's inspired Nikon Z mount lenses NONIKKOR. Unlike the Nikon lens, the name is not very visible on the actual lens.
p.2 #14 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
At least they are straightforward with the naming.
The optical formula of the Similar looks more similar to the Steel Rim, if it glows and artefact flares. I’m in.
p.2 #15 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
Sonnar-7 wrote:
At least they are straightforward with the naming.
The optical formula of the Similar looks more similar to the Steel Rim, if it glows and artefact flares. I’m in.
Initially they were going to name it "Kinda Sorta"
p.2 #16 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
Going by the fact that they name their lens "NonNikkor", it could have been worse, like "Nonsteel" steel rim :-(
They need to hire a marketing person for that company.
Apparently there are another Chinese company making replica for the steel rim: &ab_channel=%E9%9A%8B%E6%99%93%E9%BE%99%E6%94%BE%E6%AF%92%E5%A4%A7%E4%BC%9A
This is likely to be a more faithful reproduction, sort of like Light Lens Lab. What is likely happening here is non of these companies handle the production (or most of the production) themselves, but on a good day, the final part of the product, or worse, just the advertising part.
p.2 #18 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
catacore wrote:
I can't justify, other than I was cheating. And I do like their lens.
But, at least, I am not hiding behind justifications like "everything is legal, moral and ethical" just because it works for me (e.g. having "Leica rendering" without paying Leica prices).
In the particular case of the Elcan lens, as someone was wondering somewhere, "why would LLL copy such a mediocre lens" (giving that the Elcan was created with price constraints) - and the answer is "just because the original is worth 30k these days".
No one is hiding behind anything. What LLL is doing is in fact "legal, moral, and ethical". It is how intellectual property rights are intended to work.
p.2 #20 · Funleader to Release Lens Inspired by Leica 35/1.4 Summilux
catacore wrote:
I can't justify, other than I was cheating. And I do like their lens.
But, at least, I am not hiding behind justifications like "everything is legal, moral and ethical" just because it works for me (e.g. having "Leica rendering" without paying Leica prices).
In the particular case of the Elcan lens, as someone was wondering somewhere, "why would LLL copy such a mediocre lens" (giving that the Elcan was created with price constraints) - and the answer is "just because the original is worth 30k these days".
If, after reading the comments on this thread, you still feel that owning an LLL lens is illegal, immoral, or unethical, it might be best to sell it and move on. There's no need to carry that feeling with you. For everyone else, keep enjoying your LLL lenses!
