Issues for Leica to Address

In fairness to Leica, several well respected reviewers missed the color shift. As has been pointed out there are folks using the camera that still claim they hardley ever need a filter. Could careful testing have discoered it, yes probably; however with pressure to get it out to the market and an error that wasn't readily detected the mistake is understandable. Most of us don't remember what someone was wearing after several hundred shots (especially the liquid ones🙂). Even if they saw the problem they may not have known the cause until a significant amount of time was spent researching the data because they would have assumed the sensor was performing to specifications and thought it was a software issue that they could fix. It is always easy with hindsight to identify and solve the problem.
 
>In fairness to Leica, several well respected reviewers missed the color shift.

I have to wonder if some of them conveniently missed it.

Some reviewers, like the latest in the horribly misnamed rag Rangefinder who failed to mention hardly any flaws in the camera, I suspect, are a bit too cozy with Leica to go negative (where ever it may be deserved) and to be truly objective.

The aforementioned reviewer, I know from experience, depends on Leica for loaner equipment for one or more of the workshops he teaches.

Something about biting the hand that feeds...
 
While it may be true that some reviewers have a close realtionship with Leica I wouldn't go so far as to impugn their integrity. I review Bluetooth headsets and smartphones and post the results on my web site. I can tell you that I tell it the way I see it. Have I occasionally missed something that someone else catches, yes I have. Was it intentional? Absolutely not. Everyone now knows it was due to an IR problem but go back to the early posts when the problem was first identified. There was all kind of speculation on what could be causing the problem just as there is now about the crashing. Until Leica engineers tell us what they found we are just guessing, the same as before.
 
M8 Eulogy

M8 Eulogy

The M8 eulogy, when he was beat to death, we laid Barbaro to his rest. As will happen, to even the best, the M8 has failed the test. Now can we please lay it to rest.
 
barjohn said:
I can tell you that I tell it the way I see it. Have I occasionally missed something that someone else catches, yes I have. Was it intentional? Absolutely not.
Click to expand...
I would guess that you do not send advance copies of your reviews to the manufacturers for their pre-publication comments. And I would guess that you would not revise a review before publication, at the manufacturer's request, to remove references to problems you had noticed with the product. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/leica-m8.shtml
 
I send products to magazines for review all the time. In fact I just had a magazine to my factory for a tour and interview for an upcoming review. Do you know when I get a chance to read that review? When it’s already been sent to the printer so I can reply in the Manufacturers Comments section. Conspiracy theorists beware.
 
Matthew Runkel said:
I would guess that you do not send advance copies of your reviews to the manufacturers for their pre-publication comments. And I would guess that you would not revise a review before publication, at the manufacturer's request, to remove references to problems you had noticed with the product. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/leica-m8.shtml
Click to expand...

Actually, sometimes I have in order to get their side of the story and just in case I have a defective unit. However, I state what I have done in my review and I don't change it unless it was due to a defective unit and I indicate in my review that my first unit was defective. I also occasionally do follow on reviews if I have gained more experience with the device. My objective is not to shoot down a product but to give a consumer a fair opportunity to know the good and the bad and make an informed choice.
 
The reviewers and the manufacturer must be held separately, not jointly, responsible for their errors and omissions.
 
I dont know how many times I have said this, but you really have got to try this camera out for yourself. One simply can not rely on reviewers. This is not like an academic reviewer for a professional journal with defined standards and accepted methods of analysis or evaluation. There are no objective tests. For the vast majority photography is a hobby albeit a serious one. At the end of the day the reviewer has no accountability for what they write. For me what this camera has to offer more than offsets its potential limitations. I did not want to like this camera as I am pretty keen on film, but it has an immediate appeal in use, and believe me, if you try this camera you will see what the fuss is about. The real comparison is how does it compare with a film 'm' series. Do we really expect to take pictures under tungsten light with film and get away with it? I suspect that some of those who are diappointed probably ordered this camera 'blind' without trying it. I suspect that for any product, this is invariably going to be associated with more disappointment than if one makes an informed decision, which can after all only come from tryhing out before purchase.
 
How does it come every M8 related thread ends as a repetition of a random M8 thread of 3 months ago ....... it's obvious Leica engeneers made a lot more progression last 3 months than most contributors to threads like this 🙄 😀
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom