Ben Z
Veteran
I would absolutely not use superglue/crazyglue aka cyanoacrylate. It tends to react with certain plastics and the outgassing turns the plastic cloudy/frosty.
jke
Well-known
I don't understand why one would put a screen protector on a screen protector (sort of like putting a filter on to protect your filter?
) but I also do know that Leica M8 cameras are not infrequent visitors to Leica for repairs. I think that the M8 is built like a digital camera, not like a film camera. All those extra things that go into making the M8 a digital camera are the things that are most likely to break or have issues. Subtract those things and you probably have the dependability of a film camera.
I would wonder too if M8s are making any more frequent trips to the repair shop than say, Nikon D200s or Canon 5Ds or even Canon 1Ds MkIII, given equal levels of use (and as a percentage of total cameras sold of course.) Certainly the latter camera has had a lot of AF problems, problems, which again you wouldn't have if the camera had no AF. This may sound like specious reasoning, but mechanically speaking, I would expect that the durability of a digital camera would be lower than the durability of a film camera, even if the digital camera costs $5500. There are just more things to go wrong on it.
That's why the guarantee is much more important on gizmos, as is customer service. And those two things should be why you spent $5500 on the camera - that Leica as a reputable company would stand behind its camera and repair or replace any defective item that may appear. If not, paying $5500 may have been too much.
) but I also do know that Leica M8 cameras are not infrequent visitors to Leica for repairs. I think that the M8 is built like a digital camera, not like a film camera. All those extra things that go into making the M8 a digital camera are the things that are most likely to break or have issues. Subtract those things and you probably have the dependability of a film camera. I would wonder too if M8s are making any more frequent trips to the repair shop than say, Nikon D200s or Canon 5Ds or even Canon 1Ds MkIII, given equal levels of use (and as a percentage of total cameras sold of course.) Certainly the latter camera has had a lot of AF problems, problems, which again you wouldn't have if the camera had no AF. This may sound like specious reasoning, but mechanically speaking, I would expect that the durability of a digital camera would be lower than the durability of a film camera, even if the digital camera costs $5500. There are just more things to go wrong on it.
That's why the guarantee is much more important on gizmos, as is customer service. And those two things should be why you spent $5500 on the camera - that Leica as a reputable company would stand behind its camera and repair or replace any defective item that may appear. If not, paying $5500 may have been too much.