Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #1 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
architekt wrote:
I think the lens design patent for both Q3 and Q3 43 are designed by Panasonic optic engineers. I think Leica probably give a large sum of money to Panasonic to not release a LUMIX Q.
Leica and Panasonic are partners. They work together on many lenses and both are members of the L mount alliance. They cooperate on many fronts. It really isn't surprising that the Q3 26mm lens and the Q3 43mm lens were designed by Panasonic and I would be surprised if the two companies didn't talk about fixed lens cameras and which company would and would not develop such products. Such is the nature of corporate partnerships.
p.47 #3 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Additionally, it’s undoubtable that Leica had some say in the design of the lenses, even if the patents are attributed to Panasonic. Leica does not want to put lenses that don’t meet their requirements on their own cameras that are branded as Leicas. So while technically the lens design is attributed to Panasonic, it’s likely that Leica had a lot of influence on the final design.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Leica and Panasonic are partners. They work together on many lenses and both are members of the L mount alliance. They cooperate on many fronts. It really isn't surprising that the Q3 26mm lens and the Q3 43mm lens were designed by Panasonic and I would be surprised if the two companies didn't talk about fixed lens cameras and which company would and would not develop such products. Such is the nature of corporate partnerships.
p.47 #4 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
weezintrumpete wrote:
Additionally, it’s undoubtable that Leica had some say in the design of the lenses, even if the patents are attributed to Panasonic. Leica does not want to put lenses that don’t meet their requirements on their own cameras that are branded as Leicas. So while technically the lens design is attributed to Panasonic, it’s likely that Leica had a lot of influence on the final design.
I think modern leica m lens generally have great distortion control. But the lenses on both Qs generally have a lot more distortion than Leica m shooters would like. Although in this day and age, easily fixable using computational photography.
p.47 #5 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
weezintrumpete wrote:
Additionally, it’s undoubtable that Leica had some say in the design of the lenses, even if the patents are attributed to Panasonic.
Leica does not want to put lenses that don’t meet their requirements on their own cameras that are branded as Leicas. So while technically the lens design is attributed to Panasonic, it’s likely that Leica had a lot of influence on the final design.
May I ask how you know what Leica wants and doesn't want, and what Leica has been involved in to any extent? Leica obviously wants AF lenses above all else, and for that, they rely on partners. And above all, Leica, like everyone else, wants the highest possible profit margin. If Leica didn't accept anything other than "Leica-like" lenses, they wouldn't build existing Sigma L mount lenses into their own bodies and then sell them for twice the price.
p.47 #6 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Now that DPreview's image-comparison tool has been updated with the RX1III, it's interesting to see how different 'compacts' compare, and in terms of usual metrics, the Sonnar 2/35 isn't that good anymore. The Zeiss ZX1 with its Distagon 2/35 shares a somewhat same design idea with the RX1III (optics and sensor attached together via hand assembling to create tighter tolerances). So in a sense, the Distagon 2/35 is what the RX1III could have been if lens would have been upgraded. Looking at the DPreview's image-comparison tool the Distagon 2/35 seems the best to me of all the compacts, such as RX1III, Q43 and 100RF (sharpness and contrast). It's a bit sad that the ZX1 itself is such a quirky camera. Can't fault the Sonnar's rendering thought..
p.47 #7 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Kalainen wrote:
Now that DPreview's image-comparison tool has been updated with the RX1III, it's interesting to see how different 'compacts' compare, and in terms of usual metrics, the Sonnar 2/35 isn't that good anymore. The Zeiss ZX1 with its Distagon 2/35 shares a somewhat same design idea with the RX1III (optics and sensor attached together via hand assembling to create tighter tolerances). So in a sense, the Distagon 2/35 is what the RX1III could have been if lens would have been upgraded. Looking at the DPreview's image-comparison tool the Distagon 2/35 seems the best to me of all the compacts, such as RX1III, Q43 and 100RF (sharpness and contrast). It's a bit sad that the ZX1 itself is such a quirky camera. Can't fault the Sonnar's rendering thought.....Show more →
The lens behaves differently close distance to long distance. While close (like 2-3m) edges are not as sharp at f2, f2.8 and f4), they are at long distance even at f2. my 2cents
p.47 #8 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Nielk Mike wrote:
The lens behaves differently close distance to long distance. While close (like 2-3m) edges are not as sharp at f2, f2.8 and f4), they are at long distance even at f2. my 2cents
Leica Q's SUMMILUX 28mm f/1.7 ASPH Lens schematic design used to be on Leica's website, but was recently pulled, but I am happy Ken Rockwell kept a copy in his review (in the mid section of the review). https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/q2.htm
All the patent data is either from Google Patent or Japanese patent agency. I tried to cite Q3 and Q3 43's official lens design schematic from official source, but Q3's technical data was missing from Leica's official website, so I have to find a third party source.
You can compare lens schematic design and simulated MTF chart between these Panasonic patents and Leica's published data sheets yourself.
It is pretty common for camera manufactures to outsource low end lens design to a different company, Tamron designed a lot of low end lens for Sony and Nikon. Leica do design their high end product such as 35AA or 50AA in house.
From the schematic, design of these two lenses are very similar in style, especially where APSH elements are located. in general, design is a lot more complex compared to Zeiss ZX1.
Did I answer your question? Did I provide enough envidences showing that I am at least not completely making things up? ...Show more →
47 pages of whining drivel and i chose to comment on your post!! my mistake i apologise.
p.47 #10 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Steve Spencer wrote:
No doubt an important way to characterize fixed lens cameras is by size, but when I do I see three clear sizes:
1) As small as possible - and here we have phone cameras and the Richo GR series that can fit in most pockets.
2) Mid sized - these are clearly bigger than as small as possible and don't fit in most pockets, but clearly smaller than most interchangeable lens cameras (ILCs) -- and here we have the Fuji X100 and the Sony RX1R which are almost the same size.
3) Almost ILC sized -- and here we have the Leica Q3's and the Fuji GF100RF.
But I think another way to characterize fixed lens cameras is by price, and when we do I see three clear price tiers:
1) Essentially free - I think this is what most people who use their phone as a fixed lens camera see it as they would have bought it anyway and they alway have it in their pocket.
2) Moderate - here we have the Ricoh GR and Fuji X100 - at around $1,000 ish in price.
3) Luxury - here we have the cameras that cost more than $5,000 and that includes the Leica Q3s, the Fuji GF 100RF, and the RX1R III.
If you just segment this market into size and price in this way, you see that a lot of the market is getting sucked into the small as possible and free cell phone camera segment. We know this has happened on a massive scale. Enough so it wasn't clear there was any market left for fixed lens cameras.
What I find interesting is that in the last couple of years the luxury price segment has seemed to grow at least in products if not in sales. Leica, then Fuji, and now Sony seem to think there is a market there. What is this market? It seems to me Leica and Fuji are approaching this market by offering their fixed lens cameras as a way for photographers to have a piece of their high end cameras. You can almost have a Leica M with a Leica Q. You can get a medium format sensor with a Fuji GF 100RF. Leica and Fuji haven't really focussed on small, but on creating a bit of the experience of using their high end systems. It seems that for both these companies part of the strategy could include getting the fixed lens camera might entice people to get more high end gear. You start with a Leica Q, but that naturally leads to a Leica M or a Leica SL. You start with the Fuji GF100RF, but that leads to a GF 100S II, and a bunch of GF lenses.
Sony seems to be going a different direction. The RX1R III isn't that much like their current ILCs. Instead it stands out by being smaller. I don't see it as likely to lead many people into buying an A1 II or a A9 III. Perhaps their strategy is to get people to use it along side their ILCs, but I don't see it as leading them into higher end gear. If you care primarily about size and you want a high end/high price fixed lens camera then the RX1R III seems like the clear choice. Sony seems to think there is a decent market of such people. We will see by how this camera sells whether they are right....Show more →
This is a very well stated observation—that I agree with. As to how well it we’ll sell, that depends on Sony’s goals…but if stock availability when compared to its competition is an indicator, then I would say it’s not doing so well because there seems to be stock available everywhere — which has not been the case with it’s competitors .
Leica Q's SUMMILUX 28mm f/1.7 ASPH Lens schematic design used to be on Leica's website, but was recently pulled, but I am happy Ken Rockwell kept a copy in his review (in the mid section of the review). https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/q2.htm
All the patent data is either from Google Patent or Japanese patent agency. I tried to cite Q3 and Q3 43's official lens design schematic from official source, but Q3's technical data was missing from Leica's official website, so I have to find a third party source.
You can compare lens schematic design and simulated MTF chart between these Panasonic patents and Leica's published data sheets yourself.
It is pretty common for camera manufactures to outsource low end lens design to a different company, Tamron designed a lot of low end lens for Sony and Nikon. Leica do design their high end product such as 35AA or 50AA in house.
From the schematic, design of these two lenses are very similar in style, especially where APSH elements are located. in general, design is a lot more complex compared to Zeiss ZX1.
Did I answer your question? Did I provide enough envidences showing that I am at least not completely making things up? ...Show more →
😂 Dayyyyuuummm - talk about shutting someone up with facts/data driven response. Well done, now next question 😝
p.47 #12 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
I would think that Leica Q3 as a whole is a Panasonic camera made by Panasonic for Leica - frankly its priced too low for it to be an actual Leica camera. Leica SL3 is priced at $7500, and Leica 28mm f2 alone is priced at $5500. Leica Q3 is priced 'only' around $6700. It is not likely that Leica will make a camera which combines a body and lens and sell it for less than what the body alone costs. If it was a Leica camera it would have been probably over $13000 or something.
p.47 #14 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Nifty Fifty wrote:
May I ask how you know what Leica wants and doesn't want, and what Leica has been involved in to any extent? Leica obviously wants AF lenses above all else, and for that, they rely on partners. And above all, Leica, like everyone else, wants the highest possible profit margin. If Leica didn't accept anything other than "Leica-like" lenses, they wouldn't build existing Sigma L mount lenses into their own bodies and then sell them for twice the price.
Leica would not put their name on, sell in their stores, make special editions of and heavily promote a very popular camera that didn't meet their requirements, whatever those are. So to think that Leica didn't have a say in the lens design or other aspects of the camera is silly. Of course they did. I did not say that Leica is holding the Q lens to their other lens standards, only that they had their own requirements for it that they worked with Panasonic on. It's possible that Leica gave Panasonic some targets, Panasonic hit them and that was the end of that. We don't know. Leica was Panasonic's customer for this camera, and Leica would not have accepted something that they weren't proud of.
p.47 #15 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
curious80 wrote:
I would think that Leica Q3 as a whole is a Panasonic camera made by Panasonic for Leica - frankly its priced too low for it to be an actual Leica camera. Leica SL3 is priced at $7500, and Leica 28mm f2 alone is priced at $5500. Leica Q3 is priced 'only' around $6700. It is not likely that Leica will make a camera which combines a body and lens and sell it for less than what the body alone costs. If it was a Leica camera it would have been probably over $13000 or something.
The fact that the Q3 seems far more reliable than your typical "Leica" camera is another data point to suggest it's not actually a Leica
p.47 #16 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
curious80 wrote:
I would think that Leica Q3 as a whole is a Panasonic camera made by Panasonic for Leica - frankly its priced too low for it to be an actual Leica camera. Leica SL3 is priced at $7500, and Leica 28mm f2 alone is priced at $5500. Leica Q3 is priced 'only' around $6700. It is not likely that Leica will make a camera which combines a body and lens and sell it for less than what the body alone costs. If it was a Leica camera it would have been probably over $13000 or something.
And if I tell you that the SL2 is also priced at €6,000, but a few months ago it was suddenly officially sold here in Germany for €2,500? Do you really think Leica made a loss on that selling price? I don't.
p.47 #17 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
weezintrumpete wrote
Common sense says that Leica would not put their name on a camera that didn't meet their requirements, whatever those are. Not only is their name on the camera, it's on of their most popular models that they sell in their stores.
That wasn't the issue. It wasn't about whether Leica makes demands on the quality of purchased products. EVERY manufacturer does that. It was about your claim that LEICA was the mastermind behind the development of third-party lenses for Leica. And you have absolutely zero evidence for that other than your own common sense. What does your common sense actually say about the original Leica half cases for the Q43, which were advertised in the web store as having a cover for changing the battery, but which in fact didn't have a cover at all? None of the Leica people noticed. Only after the first complaints from buyers came in were the item withdrawn from sale and the customers refunded. So much for claims regarding third-party products.
weezintrumpete wrote
So to think that Leica didn't have a say in the lens design or other aspects of the camera is silly. Of course they did. I did not say that Leica is holding the Q lens to their other lens standards, only that they had their own requirements for it.
Please cite a source other than common sense. Besides, I've already cited Sigma as an example of how Leica sells Leica lenses that Sigma previously offered under its own name. At least as far as the optics are concerned.
However, all of this doesn't really belong in the Sony forum.
p.47 #18 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
RoamingScott wrote:
The fact that the Q3 seems far more reliable than your typical "Leica" camera is another data point to suggest it's not actually a Leica
Just to be clear it makes zero difference to me whether Q3 is a Leica camera or not. I care more about what a camera delivers rather than who made it. I was pointing it out for those who do care about these things
p.47 #19 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Nifty Fifty wrote:
And if I tell you that the SL2 is also priced at €6,000, but a few months ago it was suddenly officially sold here in Germany for €2,500? Do you really think Leica made a loss on that selling price? I don't.
Not exactly sure what you are trying to imply here
... is there still anyone in here discussing the Sony RX1R III?