Re: [Leica] Digilux?

[Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net>]

Sonny

Sounds just like the arguments we had in the Porsche world about
the "Porsche" 914, 924, and 944.  My position was/ is "If it wasn't
made in the Porsche factory, it isn't a Porsche"  Do you have any
problem with that?

Jerry

Sonny Carter wrote:

> Larry, there's a lot of that going on in the world today.  If you buy a
> Mazda truck, it will probably be built by Ford in Mexico with a German
> engine, and maybe a French Tranny.   If you buy an Isuzu pickup truck, rest
> assured it was made by some us rednecks in Louisiana.
>
> Leica has been having  P&S cameras made by Japanese companies (mostly
> Panasonic)  for some years, and elements of the R cameras and some lenses
> were made in Japan by various manufacturers.
>
> I guess there's no answer your question of to what extent does Solms have to
> be involved to call it a Leica is purely hypothetical.  There are some who
> say if it wasn't made in Wetzlar it is not a true Leica, but they would be
> discounting lots of nice Canadian made equipment.
>
> If we follow your line, some Noctiluxes were made by General Motors, because
> for a while they were the owners of the Midland plant where the light-sucker
> was made.
>
> 'tis a hard question with probably no answer, but I do consider my Lika
> Leica, Leica quality
>
> Sonny
> (who lived in Wetzlar, visited Solms, but has no actual Leica-made parts in
> his construction.)
> http://www.sonc.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <LRZeitlin@aol.com>
> To: <leica-users-digest@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 8:01 AM
> Subject: [Leica] Digilux?
>
> > Question:
> >
> > I know of at least four different cameras, made by two manufacturers,
> bearing
> > the name Leica Digilux. One series, the Fuji made Digiluxes, were simply
> the
> > cosmetically altered Fuji Finepix 1700, 1700 Zoom, and 4800 cameras. The
> other
> > is the Panasonic DC5 variation. With the Fuji cameras, Leica didn't even
> > claim responsibility for the lens. All they contributed was an expensive
> brochure
> > and the red Leica dot. Even the manual was printed in Japan. Leica claims
> to
> > have a hand in designing the Panasonic version but their touch seems very
> light
> > indeed.
> >
> > How much of an influence does Leica have to have in the design of a camera
> to
> > be truly regarded as a Leica? Does it make the lens? Does it make the
> body?
> > Does it simply lease the rights to the name? If the red dot falls off my
> (Fuji)
> > Leica Digilux Zoom, is it still a Leica?
> >
> > This is a question worthy of Philosophy 101. You know, like the famous
> broken
> > knife problem. If a knife blade breaks and you replace the blade, then the
> > handle breaks and you replace the handle, is it the same knife?
> >
> > Larry Z
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html