Comment on Leica Quality

peter_n said:
... If you pay top dollar it is not unreasonable to expect top quality.
Click to expand...
Of course it's not unreasonable to expect it. That doesn't mean you get it though.

Companies have noticed that people tend to equate "most expensive" with "the best". It therefore makes sense to up your prices and invest more heavily in *image* rather than in quality.

Of course, at the other end of the scale you have customers who want the cheapest product and are surprised when the quality drops.

I sympathize with the original poster - but it's not just cameras or Leica. Seems to me to be all my most expensive, high quality, bought new products that go wrong:

* Omega Seamaster Professional (stopwatch stopped working)

* Apple PowerBook (lower third of screen blank / scrambled - a loose contact but they want EUR 1000+ to "fix" it - i.e. replace the screen)

*Leica M7 (top plate loose and now jams after 10 exposures, so off to Solms under guarantee)

Oh I forgot a couple:

Nikon D70 (unfixable back focus, from day one - but exchange refused)
Zeiss ZM 25 (something loose and wobbly)

No, I don't mishandle my things - all my cheaper watches, cameras and computers are OK.

The solution is simply to not buy anything and become a hermit in a cave. Give up photography and learn to draw using burnt sticks and coloured earth.


colin
 
Last edited:
Hi,
I never had any problems with my Leica M's. Not even problems with the rf's.
I did however had two miniluxes with the E02 error and CM with the battery problem.
My two R3's have now both developed problems with the AE. My R8 once refused a few minutes when the back lcd stopped working.
But the M's, never a problem.

Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema
 
I'm afraid that I, too, have been disappointed with the quality of relatively recent Leica cameras.

My only new Leica was a M6 TTL which I purchased new in 2003. I gave it pretty light use, but after about ten rolls of film, the flash synchronization failed and the viewfinder frame selector also failed. Pretty disappointing perfomance for a brand-new camera.

Sherry Krauter repaired both of these faults for me. Presumably, now that Sherry has had a go at my M6TTL, it was (re)assembled properly and should now be reliable.

I also have a Wetzlar-built M6 classic that has never had problems. Sherry CLA'd this guy after about 75 rolls of film (I bought the camera second hand, and much prefer to have new acquistions serviced) , continues to work like a charm and has become my favorite. I I could have only one camera, this would be the one.
 
Should not have posted above re: Nikons. My 80-200/2.8 AF-S went far south on me today during a national athletic event... :mad:
 
IMHO the only thing £eica now have of any value is their name and the little red badge, (Mine has just dropped off my M6 - is that a sign?)

Do they have a business strategy?

People are now buying digital cameras by the millions - they are "cheap" in price but not in features - the market is certainly there

Buy the latest P & S - very sophisticated - just look at the Canon Powershot A640 for less than $400

Will £eica survive - maybe with the help of someone like CV, with a completely different business strategy and pricing structure.

Or sell the Brand to one of those luxury goods outfits and produce 5,000 pieces of "neck jewellry" per annum" - there are enough rich people out there who will buy them without ever pressing the shutter.

Just my views

sorry this is a thread on "Quality" - somehow I missed that point
 
They make good photographic gear - but my canon DSLR is also extremely well made, has braved the elements and isn't finicky about pretty much anything. Also my olympus om2n is very strong - has been super reliable for me.

It is true that shooting a nice leica is unlike anything else though - simplicity is a beautiful thing.
 
Stuart I've paid the (increased) prices but the same level of quality isn't there. That's my issue. In part you pay these prices so that you won't have problems but I haven't had that experience, at least with lenses (where Leica makes a big profit). I bought 4 new ASPH lenses last year and 3 had to go back. So I'm disinclined to buy any more.
 
the m4 was $288 in 1967. adjusting for inflation, this year it would have been $1,792.90. not exactly less than $3495 for a new mp or m7. used, you should be able to get a minty m7 or a slightly worn mp.
 
Well I bought an M7 and a couple of lenses (brandnew) last year. Everything has at least been once at the cs, which finally switched my M7 into an MP. Liked that, but still won't buy anymore Leicas now. Will switch to Zeiss.

Peter
 
StuartR said:
An M3 may have been 250 dollars, but at the time that was the equivalent of 3000, no? I seem to have heard that in a number of places. But I know that inflation calculators are unreliable in many cases, so I am not going to bother to search one out.
Click to expand...

Inflation isn't the same as increases in purchasing power.

Anyway, I bought my MP in 2002 for 2250 dollars new USA from Adorama. It is now listed at 3495 at the same store, but with a 500 dollar voucher for future Leica product purchases. So how much of the new price is a function of the calculated deflation of the dollar and how much of it is Leica jacking up the price? How much has the price gone up over in Europe?
Click to expand...

Don't know the exact answers to these questions, but when the Euro was introduced it dropped pretty quickly to around 0.90 USD. It's now at around 1.35 USD, which is a 50% increase. So I guess that accounts for most of the increase.

Hey! I managed not to make a political comment..

:)


colin
 
colinh said:
Inflation isn't the same as increases in purchasing power.



Don't know the exact answers to these questions, but when the Euro was introduced it dropped pretty quickly to around 0.90 USD. It's now at around 1.35 USD, which is a 50% increase. So I guess that accounts for most of the increase.

Hey! I managed not to make a political comment..

:)


colin
Click to expand...

I'll try not to be political too. You point to the no. 1 reason so many americans here find the Leica so expensive. This is due to a gradual drop in (real) purchasing power (after cost of education, health care etc etc,.) compared to 'the rest of the world', practically.

For us norwegians: Except for some shorts weeks back in 1945 when german soldiers traded their Leica cameras for a kilo of butter before going home, the price of Leica cameras has gone up too. But so has our purchasing power which has increased drastically,- espeically in dollars. Then we pay cheaply for services that are very expensive in the US, like health care and education, - and got even more money left to spend on, say, cameras. It is hard not to be political here...

But then 'the camera' has turned into a cheap and reliable piece of 'solid state technology out of china', in the digital age. China does not only sell cheap labour, but cheap minerals, oil, steel, copper, energy etc. etc. having their own internal prices of all commodities that goes into a product. Leica, still 'mechanical' produced in small volumes in a high cost country that has to live with that the price of crude oil is more than 70 $ per barrel. Like a Rollex watch, Leica look even more expensive compared even though, relatively speaking, the price actually has gone down.

It could well be that reliability has gone down. But our expectations to reliability has gone up when we compare a mechanical product to a solid state one. Back in 1945 the camera industry was a heap of rubble behind russian lines in today's Germany. Today it is two to three large multinationals with all the top brass talking japanese and with research budgets, like Canon's, some 50% larger than of all the research expenditure's, private and governmantal, of small nations, like Norway. These multi nationals can put Leica into 'mens room'. On the first floor.
 
I have one Leica - an M4-2 of happy fame. Also have three lenses for it - 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm. All were purchased new between about 1983 and 86. Still going strong, although I don't tax them with too much over-use.

I've read stories before about lowering of quality after the M4 or maybe M5. Considering the number of M's that were used by war correspondents and had the s--- beat out of them (and finish worn off), it's sad to hear about lowering of quality, if indeed it is a true matter.

As for their prices, if I told here what I paid for my outfit, it wouldn't even buy a lens nowadays. Leitz seems bent on pricing themselves out of the market, unless you count the plutocrats who spring for those "a la carte" numbers.

Someone mentioned German cars. CONSUMER REPORTS won't even recommend a Mercedes these days due to their reliability problems - at least according to C. R. But they turn up their noses at any car that isn't Japanese.
 
None of us are forced to buy Leica. There are plenty of other cameras RF and slr so if we don't like the pricing we don't have to buy. Simple enough. If Leica makes no sales they'll have to reduce pricing or go out of business. As consumers we have the choice and we have the final say. Leica isn't holding a gun to our heads. I don't think there's any one of us that could'nt do as good with a Bessa or ZI. Leica doesn't have the market cornered on top notch lenses either. Changes aren't going to come from letters to the company changes will only happen when our money speeks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom