Thanks for your message. I think, we need to emphasize that the log product formula is both important historically (which is why this formula is following slide rules and log tables), but also for modern maths (i.e., "in its own right"; think of the group isomorphism R>0 to R). That's why I reverted your edit. BTW, at the FAC discussion we spent zillions of hours tweaking and discussing about even single words in the lead. There may still be improvements (someone pointed out a prose issue at the talk page, for example), but generally speaking it is probable that someone editing the lead without reading the full article might miss something. That said, keep being bold!