Godfrey
somewhat colored
Maybe. I've never seen anything about such issues anywhere other than on this forum. I guess I don't care to hunt around for complaints all that much.
I don't know the source of your antipathy towards Leica. You take every opportunity to "not forget" anything that you dislike about them. They've always done well by me, even when I've had a problem with their products.
To each their own opinions.
G
I don't know the source of your antipathy towards Leica. You take every opportunity to "not forget" anything that you dislike about them. They've always done well by me, even when I've had a problem with their products.
To each their own opinions.
G
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
I'm imagining how expensive this will be $$$. 
Props to Leica for doing this.
Props to Leica for doing this.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I think they meant, "A preventative replacement is not offered."
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
St. Louis is not far behind!
uhoh7
Veteran
I'm imagining how expensive this will be $$$.
agreed
I knew this thread would be entertaining.
If you want the closest digital thing to film, is use and output, nothing to this day will beat an M9. With these developments it has more support than any digital camera ever made. It also holds value over time better than any FF digital. The big flap basically had no effect on resale, which has continued a gradual decline, or that's how it appears to me---a surprise.
But, I imagine this was a close run thing. If not for the bomb which went off when that communique came out suggesting there was a limit to what M9 users could except in terms of sensor support, I'm not sure we would have had the same outcome.
Today, frankly, the M9 is a steal. I see them go sometimes on eBay as low as 2200. A perfect one may fetch 3k. Were I an M film shooter, with lenses in hand, I think I would start looking, just as a nice alternative...of course not as good as film....but wow, no scanning, and I could save film!
It's been a long messy complicated story, a great camera, with a spectacular flaw: and this is not the first "sensor redo" for the M9, and maybe that is the source of some confusion. This is v3. V1 was brittle (correct me), v2 has saunanoia, and v3.....ahh well we will see
Vobluda
Well-known
Props?! :bang:
I'm imagining how expensive this will be $$$.
willie_901
Veteran
Which is precisely how come I speculated there will be no practical difference between the two sensor assemblies... especially for raw files.
raid
Dad Photographer
It is good to know that Leica does what is possible to keep their products similar in producing images. Both sensors seem to give similar colors.
willie_901
Veteran
A major difference in just the past few years is the impact of social media on corporate responsibility.
The corrosion problem can be subtle and Leica often quietly replaced M9 sensor assemblies for the cover-glass defect. Since humidity is the cause, this can not a recent problem.
However in late 2014 a Leica changed their M9 sensor replacement policies to shift costs for the corrosion defect to owners. This caused a firestorm on specialty camera forums such as this one.
About a week later I began to see posts on widely-read, mainstream general tech blogs and news aggregation apps such as Engadget. Photography represents only a fraction of their coverage. The issue even surfaced on Twitter well. Very shortly after this Leica reversed their M9 sensor replacement policy. The final result was announced this week.
As I mentioned earlier Leica's response was quite different than Nikon's (once the D600 shutter flaw became obvious). Nikon took a beating in non-photography specific WWW media outlets. They only announced a formal recall just before class-action lawsuits were filed.
The corrosion problem can be subtle and Leica often quietly replaced M9 sensor assemblies for the cover-glass defect. Since humidity is the cause, this can not a recent problem.
However in late 2014 a Leica changed their M9 sensor replacement policies to shift costs for the corrosion defect to owners. This caused a firestorm on specialty camera forums such as this one.
About a week later I began to see posts on widely-read, mainstream general tech blogs and news aggregation apps such as Engadget. Photography represents only a fraction of their coverage. The issue even surfaced on Twitter well. Very shortly after this Leica reversed their M9 sensor replacement policy. The final result was announced this week.
As I mentioned earlier Leica's response was quite different than Nikon's (once the D600 shutter flaw became obvious). Nikon took a beating in non-photography specific WWW media outlets. They only announced a formal recall just before class-action lawsuits were filed.
willie_901
Veteran
kermaier
Well-known
This past July, I brought my M9-P in to Leica NJ because the RF cam roller wasn't spinning freely. They told me that yes, they can fix that, but my sensor cover glass is corroded and they'll throw in the cam roller repair for free with the sensor replacement.
At that time, the new sensor module was still in field testing, so they were only doing replacements with the original sensor modules. I made an appointment for sensor replacement for September 7 (the earliest they could offer!).
I just phoned Leica NJ this morning about yesterday's announcement, and they said that they haven't yet been given any stock of new sensor modules, and they wish Leica AG would give them a heads-up and some stock of parts before they make announcements like this.
But they said that I can bring in my camera for the scheduled appointment, and leave them instructions not to perform the replacement until the new sensor modules are available.::Ari
raid
Dad Photographer
This reveals how slow the process is.
I hope that you will get the new sensor. Keep us informed.
I hope that you will get the new sensor. Keep us informed.
-fp
-
At least they are fixing it. M9 decision made it will be mine!
Good points IMO... I had my M9 for 3 years, then it was sold on eBay for $4800 (packaged as new) in Oct 2013, not long before the sensor problem became public. Earlier that year there had been mild online questions and comments over sensor problems and Leica replacements. I felt very fortunate, financially!
I think early-on the nature and extent of the problem wasn't known, a shock to everyone as the issue unfolded. Leica has done the right thing, and I'll bet it's been very very expensive for them.
raid
Dad Photographer
I now feel better about owning an M9 with a good sensor. If one day I suspect that the sensor needs to be inspected by Leica, I have the peace of mind that if the sensor is defective, it will be replaced.
Not seen on other forums? Google is your friend.
I think our different views are more of a glass half full / half empty sort of thing.
You seem to be mostly happy and satisfied with whatever Leica is doing on a daily basis - which is great.
I tend to look at Leica in terms its entire history. I own Leica cameras from the first year of production to the latest, from the Leica A to the Leica M-P. I have no more intention of forgetting what was done right than what was done wrong. Hot damn -- the Leica A, Leica II, Leica IIIC, Leica IIIG, M3, M2, M4, M5, M6, MP, M8.2, M9, Monochrom and M-P are all sweet cameras!
When evaluating today's Leica I also take into account Leica's price list and PR. For a company that strongly identifies with the best of the best and charges accordingly, I think Leica fans have good reason to expect the high standard they are being promised - and good reason to complain when its not met.
Not that either view is right or wrong, just different takes.
Stephen
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I couldn't agree more and I'm thinking of the minilux as I type this but being polite as it's Sunday...
Regards, David
Scheelings
Well-known
Does anyone know what the turnaround time is like?
Unknown.
At least in the US, I have not heard confirmation that Leica has started installing the new sensor yet.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
As I said, I'm not interested much in hunting for complaints.
Regards "glass half full vs glass half empty" ... I enjoy the history of Leica, but I'm not a collector. Nor do I think the company history and the fun of collecting should be intermixed with judgements about the usefulness and quality of the current products. Nor should the idiocy of marketing PR and ambiguity of owner expectations.
You seem to post mostly complaints about Leica, mostly on the basis of what you deem to be important to Leica users as expectations. I've not found that your complaints mean much to the use of my cameras, and subsequently have little negative effect on my pleasure with what the company is making. I guess we don't share expectations as closely as you imagine.
G