cbass wrote:
Remember if they don't make it, then progress will stop. The Chinese excel at copying products and finding ways to produce them for ridiculously low cost. They do not excel at innovation or new design. This is essentially a Chinese made Summilux with minor changes and it's exciting because it now makes it affordable. Overcoming the biggest issue with Leica: price. But if it puts Leica under, then innovation in this area will stagnate.
I wouldn't worry about that. Chinese companies are very much capable of innovating.
It's just going to be harder for you to make the eventual adjustment. They have the smarts, they have long term planning and the engineering prowess and they are very keen observers of the photographic and cinema world.
With respect to the Summilux, they basically used the best loved M lens, gave it a 14-blade aperture, separated the last doublet into two elements, added cine coatings and used their very special HRI glass, and removed the midrange drop-off. If the names were reversed, most would prefer the Simera optics and 3D model.
And the result, it's a great lens, more versatile, in many ways better than the original (for impartial people at least). No more cookie cutter bokeh balls at f2 and f2.8, much improved midrange (making subject placement more versatile), very smooth transition zone and bokeh, close MFD, nicer focus tab.
Now, Zeiss did similarly in ZE/ZF with their iconic Distagon 21/2.8, adding an element and coatings updates at the time the ill-advised lead ban was being instituted. Have you ever wondered why virtually all the Chinese lenses are so good - seemingly universally? Glass formulations. Another benefit is easier post-processing, as the files are more responsive; it makes my Zeiss lenses feel like very hard work.
Innovation? See the 75/1.4 and 28/1.4. Look up DJI, Sirui, Viltrox etc. It's a new world out there.
cbass wrote:
I think bokeh shape comes down to taste. The Industar 61 l/Z has unique star shaped bokeh. I love it. Especially in a world of mundane round bokeh.
Interesting! The captions on one of the images said it shows the star shape bokeh between f5.6 and f8.
Wider open it looks round and normal.
That's correct. I own a copy of this lens. It was given to me by a Russian coworker that didn't want it anymore. f/5.6-f/8 is when the star shape is there. It has a clickless aperture. I really like using this lens around Christmas trees and Christmas in general. Other than the stars it's a very good lens and close focusing.
In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the rogue nation was the United States. The official endorsing thievery was Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. And the main victim was Britain.
How times have changed.
Now, the United States accuses China of the very sort of illicit practices that helped America leapfrog European rivals two centuries ago and emerge as an industrial giant.
“The message we are sending to China today is, Do as I say, not as I did,’ ” said Peter Andreas, professor at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs. “The fact of the matter is that the U.S. was the world’s hotbed of intellectual property theft.” ...Show more →
What are your thoughts on that, or is it not applicable because it happened way back in the day?
Nov 19, 2025 at 01:01 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
What are your thoughts on that, or is it not applicable because it happened way back in the day?
Those who have technologies that others don't have will try to protect those technologies. Those who don't have the technologies will try to get them. That was true in the 18th and 19th centuries and that is true in the 21st century. It was true in times before that as well.
Perhaps we can learn important lessons from those histories, however. The specific spat brought about partly by Hamiltion's desire to industrialize the new born US played a fairly large role in the War of 1812. Hopefully, we don't let that history repeat itself. I would hope we would all agree that an actual military war between China and the US would be a very bad thing.
cbass wrote:
That's a great way to end a conversation when you don't have any meaningful point to make.
Since my meaningful point seems to have been too subtle for you, let me be blunt.
You made a racist statement about the mental capabilities of "the Chinese". Without offering any evidence whatsoever, by the way. When I challenged you, you still did not offer any evidence. Now, it was of course possible that your initial statement was just badly worded, or I misunderstood your point due to a fault of mine, which is why I mentioned that I had no interest in a discussion that seemed based on racist premises. You could have clarified your initial statement, maybe saying you phrased it badly, and you were really talking about the economic development strategy of the Chinese government, or technological catch-up. Or maybe use google to educate yourself, and try to make you point based on facts (patent applications, international royalty flows, whatever). Instead you just doubled down. So, let me reiterate: I have no desire to engage in a racist discussion about the capabilities of "the Chinese" with you, the same way I have no desire to discuss the money making skills of "the Jews" with an anti-Semite.
What are your thoughts on that, or is it not applicable because it happened way back in the day?
That is a good question. However, that is something that I am not familiar with and I don't trust apnews to be unbias about. It's not something I remember learning about in school so obviously not a proud moment in American history. Although let's be honest, I haven't been in a school for decades.
I would have to look into it more, but here I would be more interested in a few things:
Were the design copies they made used to build the domestic market or were they used to sell cheaper versions to a foreign market or to Britain itself?
Did they innovate with their own designs or did it stagnate development because they copied designs?
Finally, there is the cliche saying that two wrongs don't make a right. If the circumstances are equivalent, then the negatives and issues apply regardless if it's America or China.
cbass wrote:
But if it puts Leica under, then innovation in this area will stagnate.
Well, to be honest, that's not even necessary. The days when you could expect innovation from Leica are long gone. These days, Leica is just living off its iconic status and producing luxury items that can also be used for photography. Just look at their latest innovation, the M EV-1. They've cobbled together generic, off-the-shelf components from the parts bin and packed them into an "iconic" body, and the fans happily shell out huge sums for it. Brave new world. Personally, I find it sad.
mranger211 wrote:
Since my meaningful point seems to have been too subtle for you, let me be blunt.
You made a racist statement about the mental capabilities of "the Chinese". Without offering any evidence whatsoever, by the way. When I challenged you, you still did not offer any evidence. Now, it was of course possible that your initial statement was just badly worded, or I misunderstood your point due to a fault of mine, which is why I mentioned that I had no interest in a discussion that seemed based on racist premises. You could have clarified your initial statement, maybe saying you phrased it badly, and you were really talking about the economic development strategy of the Chinese government, or technological catch-up. Or maybe use google to educate yourself, and try to make you point based on facts (patent applications, international royalty flows, whatever). Instead you just doubled down. So, let me reiterate: I have no desire to engage in a racist discussion about the capabilities of "the Chinese" with you, the same way I have no desire to discuss the money making skills of "the Jews" with an anti-Semite....Show more →
You seem to be jumping to conclusions and making up an elaborate narrative. I gave you the opportunity to respond and said I am willing to listen if you want to bring up what they have innovated. You said you had no interest in a discussion. That's fair and your choice. It has no impact on me. Where did I make a statement on the mental capabilities? Again, you are jumping to massive conclusions. Why does it even have anything to do with mental capabilities? It's like school. You can have the mental capabilities to put in the work and study and do well or you can copy from someone else and it becomes the easy path so you stagnate.
cbass wrote:
Remember if they don't make it, then progress will stop. The Chinese excel at copying products and finding ways to produce them for ridiculously low cost. They do not excel at innovation or new design. This is essentially a Chinese made Summilux with minor changes and it's exciting because it now makes it affordable. Overcoming the biggest issue with Leica: price. But if it puts Leica under, then innovation in this area will stagnate.
I’m totally okay with what thypoch has produced with the 28,35,50 simeras
I don’t care for the insane resolving power of the new Leica (APO) lenses AT ALL - all these complex lens formulas with loads of ED glass elements leaves the resulting images appear very flat IMO. The new Leica lenses (especially for SL), look fantastic on paper (MFT) with all the calculations that went into making them - but where is the character left in that?!
It’s rather smart of DZO/Thypoch to straight up copy (& fine tune) the 35 and 50 summilux. See the review on the 35 simera on 35mmc.com - at the bottom there’s direct comparison between the 35 simera and 35 summilux - it was clear to me which images I prefer - it’s pretty obvious
I’m not keen on DZO’s cosina nokton replicas for the 21 and 75, as the many glass elements and lots of ED don’t give enough depth to the image for my personal taste. Clinical resolution ≠ aesthetic .
If you take a look at Matt osbornes video on YT comparing the Leica summulix to the thypoch cine lenses in regard to overall rendering in video - you’d be hard to spot differences in the footage (even though I preferred the thypoch footage).
Perhaps we have reached the end of lens development in the traditional sense - with all those CAD design calculations achieving “rational perfection” for pixel peepers.
It’s totally okay for me that Leica goes under - f black rock!
& perhaps it is now time to go back to basics, to lenses that flatter instead of analyzing to such immense detail.
Time to get my Asahi Pentax m42 mount lenses out and adapt to my current camera body!
Or just stick with the simeras
I’ve packed my to-go camera bag with the 28,35,50 simeras, and it’s staying that way for a good while.
Yogifi wrote:
I think the airy look, the lack of microcontrast helps with styling the image more freely in post-processing.
Been playing with some of happydan's images. Noktons I'm a bit more restricted, these seem more malleable, more receptive to presets.
Could be wrong of course. But if I'm not, it would be a nice plus for me personally, having more flexibility there to mix things up some.
When post processing the simera RAW files, there’s very little that I “have to” do. The RAW files look good already and a few edits gives me my final quick edit image. I haven’t edited the pics I posted so far for more than a few seconds
Especially for B/W conversions these simeras REALLY deliver.
Happy to send u some RAW files if
U like just DM me
Peace
cbass wrote:
You can have the mental capabilities to put in the work and study and do well or you can copy from someone else and it becomes the easy path so you stagnate.
But you can also see it as a clever tactic. Copy good things cheaply, constantly improve them, and thus beat the original. Look at what the Japanese camera industry did to the German camera industry. By the way, did you know how the "Made in Germany" seal of quality came about? Initially, "Made in Germany" was the exact opposite of a seal of quality. This designation of origin was mandated by the British Parliament in 1887 to identify "inferior" goods from German industrial production for English consumers. "Cheap and bad" was therefore the first connotation associated with "Made in Germany." Over the years, this evolved into a seal of quality that international consumers understood as an indication of high-quality products. So let's wait and see what the future holds.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
Well, to be honest, that's not even necessary. The days when you could expect innovation from Leica are long gone. These days, Leica is just living off its iconic status and producing luxury items that can also be used for photography. Just look at their latest innovation, the M EV-1. They've cobbled together generic, off-the-shelf components from the parts bin and packed them into an "iconic" body, and the fans happily shell out huge sums for it. Brave new world. Personally, I find it sad.
Sadly, I think you are mostly correct here. Leica has been riding old designs with minor improvements for quite some time or re-releasing old designs. They also have some of the most inefficient manufacturing processes. Then again, I think the Apo-Summicron 50 is an improvement (innovation) as well as the Q3 43 lens. The lenses in the SL line are massive in size, but many of those are world class when you look at the MTF charts and real world performance. Many of those SL lenses are second to none. From a technical performance I would say the SL lenses put Leica lenses at the very top of any manufacturer. Regardless if you like their size or price.
