A digital G3 would be my biggest wish. I did an exhibition at the North York Moors National Park Visitor Centre of A2 prints from transparencies - about 2/3 of them were taken with the G2 and the rest with the RTS. All the photo enthusiasts that commented to me thought they had been taken on medium format.
DPR Forum
Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!
Copyright Nlens mount etc
- Thread starter dirk
- Start date
Dirk,
Just curious, where did you hear that Kyocera is doing something for Leica? I would be really-really surprised if that was the case. Think about it, if Kyocera was partnering with Leica and Zeiss at the same time, why Zeiss and Leica couldn't establish direct partnership?
Just curious, where did you hear that Kyocera is doing something for Leica? I would be really-really surprised if that was the case. Think about it, if Kyocera was partnering with Leica and Zeiss at the same time, why Zeiss and Leica couldn't establish direct partnership?
Hi Mike,
Kyocera is/ was producing the 80-200/4.0 and 1 or two other lenses for Leica (zooms) which I do not know exactly anymore.
You might be surprised to know, that Leica used to have also Leica lenses, which have been designed by Carl Zeiss (8.0/15 and 3.5/15), by Minolta (2.8/16, 2.8/24, 8.0/500, 3.5/35-70, 4.5/75-200, 4.5/80-200) or by Schneider (4 different 21mm, PC 2.8/28, PA 4.0/35, 1.5/50, 2.8/180) or by Sigma (both versions of the current 28-70).
The industry is very small and there are not that many players with a certain know-how. Kyocera is definitely one of the few players in the market, who has a very good know-how in producing lenses and bodies.
In the mobile business by the way, you hardly can buy a mobile phone without having Kyocera parts in it.
In every industry there is a pressure to specialise to be able to survive in a cost cutting environment. You end up with only 1-3 producers of certain parts that are needed for that technology/model. If one of them dies, parts are no longer available and often a different model has to be designed, because of thise missing parts (see RX II).
As a sidenote: Ralf Coenen, who was just for 4 months the CEO of Leica (until now), was a former Zeiss employee
The world is small...
Kyocera is/ was producing the 80-200/4.0 and 1 or two other lenses for Leica (zooms) which I do not know exactly anymore.
You might be surprised to know, that Leica used to have also Leica lenses, which have been designed by Carl Zeiss (8.0/15 and 3.5/15), by Minolta (2.8/16, 2.8/24, 8.0/500, 3.5/35-70, 4.5/75-200, 4.5/80-200) or by Schneider (4 different 21mm, PC 2.8/28, PA 4.0/35, 1.5/50, 2.8/180) or by Sigma (both versions of the current 28-70).
The industry is very small and there are not that many players with a certain know-how. Kyocera is definitely one of the few players in the market, who has a very good know-how in producing lenses and bodies.
In the mobile business by the way, you hardly can buy a mobile phone without having Kyocera parts in it.
In every industry there is a pressure to specialise to be able to survive in a cost cutting environment. You end up with only 1-3 producers of certain parts that are needed for that technology/model. If one of them dies, parts are no longer available and often a different model has to be designed, because of thise missing parts (see RX II).
As a sidenote: Ralf Coenen, who was just for 4 months the CEO of Leica (until now), was a former Zeiss employee
The world is small...
Dirk,
Let me rephrase. It's one thing to design a product (lens in our case). It's totally different story when it comes to making the product. I know that Leica used designs of Zeiss, Minolta and Schneider in the past (I think there were even couple lenses that were actually made by Schneider for Leica). But using someone's design and producing your own version of a product is not the same thing as asking Kyocera to produce Summilux that will be sold as Leica. Almost any camera manufacturer produced or still produces their own version of Zeiss Planar, probably the most widely copied lens design in the world.
Also, from your post I got impression that you're saying that Kyocera is still producing something for Leica. I don't know if that's still the case, hence the question I posted.
AFAIK Kyocera did indeed produce some zoom lenses for Leica-R, but these were Sigma-designed lenses, which were then redesigned by Leica. I seriously doubt that Kyocera had any involvement with Leica-M line or that Kyocera designed AND produced lens for any Leica. Leica went to Kyocera for production of the lenses that they didn't consider top-performers (that's my understanding of their past partnership).
Leica's sales are mostly in Leica-M line and when paying over $2,000 for each lens, people certainly want the best, which is something Kyocera isn't known for.
As far as mobile phone industry goes - many makers may certainly use some parts produced by Kyocera at their discretion. But these are usually not vital parts. Kyocera's own market share in mobile phones in US will most likely disappear completely very soon - I don't know a single person that liked Kyocera phone they bought. Almost everyone I knew that had Kyocera phone switched over to Motorola, Nokia, LG, Samsung or even Ericsson within a year. To put it simply - Kyocera phones suck. This technically applies to many of their other products as well, and the problem is often not even the product itself - it's the service.
As far as Leica's former CEO goes - sure industry is small and it's not a big surprise that one German company hires a person to CEO's position that used to work for direct competitor, which is also based in Germany
Perhaps they wanted to get some inside scoop on their competitor. Perhaps it was something else. It doesn't really matter that much considering he spent only 4 months in the office.
This may also explain why he spent only 4 months at the job - perhaps clash of cultures. He wanted things done his way (the Zeiss way), the rest of Leica company wanted things done their way. Or maybe he wanted to tear everything apart and drive Leica to the ground
We will probably never know.
Anyhow, my point was that if Kyocera really partnered with Leica at the same time it was partnering with Zeiss, it's very odd that Zeiss and Leica couldn't form direct partnership.
Right now Leica has excellent partner in Matsushita. Panasonic digital cameras with Leica-designed (and probably Panasonic-produced) lenses are becoming more and more popular these days (I own one myself, it's good for what it does). And digital camera production is probably the only area where Leica would need a partner like Kyocera, but since they already deal with Matsushita, I see no point for them in dealing with Kyocera.
Going back to original discussion - I really hope that production or design of any Contax products will NOT be handled by Kyocera in future. I think Kyocera is unreliable as a partner and with their terrible service it's in our best interest that they play no role in future of the Contax brand.
Let me rephrase. It's one thing to design a product (lens in our case). It's totally different story when it comes to making the product. I know that Leica used designs of Zeiss, Minolta and Schneider in the past (I think there were even couple lenses that were actually made by Schneider for Leica). But using someone's design and producing your own version of a product is not the same thing as asking Kyocera to produce Summilux that will be sold as Leica. Almost any camera manufacturer produced or still produces their own version of Zeiss Planar, probably the most widely copied lens design in the world.
Also, from your post I got impression that you're saying that Kyocera is still producing something for Leica. I don't know if that's still the case, hence the question I posted.
AFAIK Kyocera did indeed produce some zoom lenses for Leica-R, but these were Sigma-designed lenses, which were then redesigned by Leica. I seriously doubt that Kyocera had any involvement with Leica-M line or that Kyocera designed AND produced lens for any Leica. Leica went to Kyocera for production of the lenses that they didn't consider top-performers (that's my understanding of their past partnership).
Leica's sales are mostly in Leica-M line and when paying over $2,000 for each lens, people certainly want the best, which is something Kyocera isn't known for.
As far as mobile phone industry goes - many makers may certainly use some parts produced by Kyocera at their discretion. But these are usually not vital parts. Kyocera's own market share in mobile phones in US will most likely disappear completely very soon - I don't know a single person that liked Kyocera phone they bought. Almost everyone I knew that had Kyocera phone switched over to Motorola, Nokia, LG, Samsung or even Ericsson within a year. To put it simply - Kyocera phones suck. This technically applies to many of their other products as well, and the problem is often not even the product itself - it's the service.
As far as Leica's former CEO goes - sure industry is small and it's not a big surprise that one German company hires a person to CEO's position that used to work for direct competitor, which is also based in Germany
This may also explain why he spent only 4 months at the job - perhaps clash of cultures. He wanted things done his way (the Zeiss way), the rest of Leica company wanted things done their way. Or maybe he wanted to tear everything apart and drive Leica to the ground
Anyhow, my point was that if Kyocera really partnered with Leica at the same time it was partnering with Zeiss, it's very odd that Zeiss and Leica couldn't form direct partnership.
Right now Leica has excellent partner in Matsushita. Panasonic digital cameras with Leica-designed (and probably Panasonic-produced) lenses are becoming more and more popular these days (I own one myself, it's good for what it does). And digital camera production is probably the only area where Leica would need a partner like Kyocera, but since they already deal with Matsushita, I see no point for them in dealing with Kyocera.
Going back to original discussion - I really hope that production or design of any Contax products will NOT be handled by Kyocera in future. I think Kyocera is unreliable as a partner and with their terrible service it's in our best interest that they play no role in future of the Contax brand.
All,
Just as an FYI... the 35-70mm F4 zoom for the R series is still produced by Kyocera and it is a true Leica design, not a derivative of the old Sigma sourced lenses. Believe it or not Kyocera is pretty well thought of as a OEM lens producer. Too bad their management succeeded in blowing Contax apart.
They have never produced a M lens to my knowledge.
Hope everyone's having a good day!
Kent
ps- I just got some pictures back from visiting a presidential library a few weeks back and I am more pleased then ever with my G2. Nice lenses for the $$$.
Just as an FYI... the 35-70mm F4 zoom for the R series is still produced by Kyocera and it is a true Leica design, not a derivative of the old Sigma sourced lenses. Believe it or not Kyocera is pretty well thought of as a OEM lens producer. Too bad their management succeeded in blowing Contax apart.
They have never produced a M lens to my knowledge.
Hope everyone's having a good day!
Kent
ps- I just got some pictures back from visiting a presidential library a few weeks back and I am more pleased then ever with my G2. Nice lenses for the $$$.
Hello,
I am new to this forum. It is a pity with the uncertain future of Contax. The factory manufacturing the Zeiss lenses for Contax is in Japan. Who owns this factory? Is it Zeiss or Kyocera? If Zeiss owns it, is it possible for Zeiss to still produce lenses even if Kyocera does not manufacture the Contax brand?
I am new to this forum. It is a pity with the uncertain future of Contax. The factory manufacturing the Zeiss lenses for Contax is in Japan. Who owns this factory? Is it Zeiss or Kyocera? If Zeiss owns it, is it possible for Zeiss to still produce lenses even if Kyocera does not manufacture the Contax brand?
Hi Patrik,
welcome to the Contax community!
The factories in Japan are owned bei Kyocera. Kyocera is also producing on an order-by order basis for other manufacturers. Zeiss has the final control at the end of the production line within the Kyocera factory (of course only for Contax lenses). So the Zeiss standard is kept there, although Zeiss is not producing them in their own factory.
Because of the quality control by Zeiss, all Contax lenses (no matter where they are produced) have the Zeiss name on it - also for othert cooperation partner of Zeiss.
If you look for ex&le at Rollei lenses, there are some with the name Zeiss on them and some with the name Rollei (i.e. the Planar 80/2.8) on it. This means that the lens design is from Zeiss, but Zeiss did not do the quality control. Therefore they do not allow to have the Zeiss name on it...
This does not mean that they are inferior. It is just a business practice from Zeiss, that as long as they do not make the quality-control, they do not want to have the Zeiss name on it...
So why some manufacturers then do not have always Zeiss doing the control? IMO this is a question of price
welcome to the Contax community!
The factories in Japan are owned bei Kyocera. Kyocera is also producing on an order-by order basis for other manufacturers. Zeiss has the final control at the end of the production line within the Kyocera factory (of course only for Contax lenses). So the Zeiss standard is kept there, although Zeiss is not producing them in their own factory.
Because of the quality control by Zeiss, all Contax lenses (no matter where they are produced) have the Zeiss name on it - also for othert cooperation partner of Zeiss.
If you look for ex&le at Rollei lenses, there are some with the name Zeiss on them and some with the name Rollei (i.e. the Planar 80/2.8) on it. This means that the lens design is from Zeiss, but Zeiss did not do the quality control. Therefore they do not allow to have the Zeiss name on it...
This does not mean that they are inferior. It is just a business practice from Zeiss, that as long as they do not make the quality-control, they do not want to have the Zeiss name on it...
So why some manufacturers then do not have always Zeiss doing the control? IMO this is a question of price