noimmunity
scratch my niche
Yup, a rethink is in order, indeed.
Were I endowed with sufficient disposable income, this latest installment in the ongoing Saga of M9 Sensor Woes (part of the Trials and Tribulations of Leica Digital trilogy) wouldn't stop me from reacquiring an M9 or moving to an M240. But I don't. And the conclusion I've drawn from this Saga is that purchasing an M9 is too risky, while a Typ 240 is too expensive.
I've had both an M8 and an M9, both purchased new at the end of their production cycle, but I'm no longer planning to renew my "subscription" to digital Leica. I finally have to admit that it is just too expensive for me given all the potential costs and risks post purchase. I can't follow the Leica "upgrade" path, and I consider justifying the high purchase price of a Leica digital M by the intent of using it "for a very long time" to be exceedingly risky.
Besides the cost, there is also Leica's handling of the issue. The conclusions that one draws really depends, I'm seeing, on how you understand what the issue was to begin with. To my mind, it is a story about the company's long-term disavowal of the by now long history of problems with the CCD sensors and their digital M products in general. It is also a story about how a niche market of enthusiasts and pros has been used to enable the company's difficult transition into a luxury digital brand that effectively prices some of those very same enthusiasts and pros out of the niche.
Were I endowed with sufficient disposable income, this latest installment in the ongoing Saga of M9 Sensor Woes (part of the Trials and Tribulations of Leica Digital trilogy) wouldn't stop me from reacquiring an M9 or moving to an M240. But I don't. And the conclusion I've drawn from this Saga is that purchasing an M9 is too risky, while a Typ 240 is too expensive.
I've had both an M8 and an M9, both purchased new at the end of their production cycle, but I'm no longer planning to renew my "subscription" to digital Leica. I finally have to admit that it is just too expensive for me given all the potential costs and risks post purchase. I can't follow the Leica "upgrade" path, and I consider justifying the high purchase price of a Leica digital M by the intent of using it "for a very long time" to be exceedingly risky.
Besides the cost, there is also Leica's handling of the issue. The conclusions that one draws really depends, I'm seeing, on how you understand what the issue was to begin with. To my mind, it is a story about the company's long-term disavowal of the by now long history of problems with the CCD sensors and their digital M products in general. It is also a story about how a niche market of enthusiasts and pros has been used to enable the company's difficult transition into a luxury digital brand that effectively prices some of those very same enthusiasts and pros out of the niche.
burancap
Veteran
I too threw in towel for the near future. I really thought I was going to be shooting one again this weekend. After days of careful consideration and deliberation, I went from M9 to M-E, considered the Monochrom in the classifieds, and settled on a BP M9-P. Then ... the damnedest thing happened. My finger stalled on the "submit order" button. I hesitated, took a deep breath, and bought an M2, M7, and another Fuji X digital.
uhoh7
Veteran
I guess it's a matter of perspective. You love and appreciate the M9 or you don't.
If you do you are very happy.
It doesn't really matter what Leica's motivation is. The action is what counts.
They have decided to make it possible to use the M9 for years to come.
If you don't care, you don't care and you can go on about how there is this flaw or the other with either the company or the camera. Frankly one wonders why a person would take the time.
I guess I could pop over to a M/43 forum and list all the reasons why it's not for me. It seems pointless however since I've already decided I'm not interested. LOL
I guess there is some cathartic aspect to trashing digital leica
If you do you are very happy.
It doesn't really matter what Leica's motivation is. The action is what counts.
They have decided to make it possible to use the M9 for years to come.
If you don't care, you don't care and you can go on about how there is this flaw or the other with either the company or the camera. Frankly one wonders why a person would take the time.
I guess I could pop over to a M/43 forum and list all the reasons why it's not for me. It seems pointless however since I've already decided I'm not interested. LOL
I guess there is some cathartic aspect to trashing digital leica
rbelyell
Well-known
mike and jon's comments are so exceedingly on point. theres one and only one reason to buy a digital m: because, outside of the 6mp epson rd1 ( which i use) theyre the only digital rangefinder. thats it, there are no other reasons. starting with the m8 uv fiasco--where they also initially blamed their $5000-a-shot consumers--leica has proven that whatever deserved reputation for quality they derived from their film cams and lenses overwhemingly does not apply to their digital offerings. and their first instinct as a company has repeatedly been to first cover up defects, then blame their customers. as far as digital m's go, to paraphrase another thread, these are at best cadillac automobiles made in a ferrari factory.
thats not to say one shouldnt buy them. in fact they almost must be bought if one strives to achieve a digital rf experience. and in this field 'feel' and user experience cannot be overestimated. just dont fool yourselves--or the rest of us--that the price of these specific items are reflective of superior quality when its merely reflective of a singular position in the marketplace.
thats not to say one shouldnt buy them. in fact they almost must be bought if one strives to achieve a digital rf experience. and in this field 'feel' and user experience cannot be overestimated. just dont fool yourselves--or the rest of us--that the price of these specific items are reflective of superior quality when its merely reflective of a singular position in the marketplace.
uhoh7
Veteran
Actually for me, the RF is second tier to my love for the camera. I have grown to very much enjoy the rangefinder, but I bought the camera for what it can do with M and LTM glass, not the focus system. It took me many months to really get to prefer it to the current Sony method. But the images dropped my jaw the first day I owned the camera.
To my own taste there is no equal in that regard today. At any price. So the going used rate of around 3200 with a fresh sensor does not seem outrageous. Especially since they have just said they replace the sensor indefinitely for free.
I'm not rich. But to me the full frame digital results the M9 gives out every day are worth every penny.
But many things which are important to me are not important to other people. They'd rather have a new countertop. I usually refrain from telling them what fools they are LOL
Somebody thinks a Fuji is better for them than a Leica, hey go for it. I won't be following them in the Fuji forum to explain why they are crazy. I just love the camera I love, and all the incredible glass it shows off so well
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I never see you as a bitchy person Michael and have noted that your postings here and elsewhere are invariably considered and thoughtful.
I think Leica's attempt to blame users or suggest that improper sensor cleaning may have caused this issue is pretty standard fare for companies these days ... ultimately they are trying to protect their investors instead of their customers which I find repulsive.
I also agree with what a lot of people have said that the luxury market they have created for their photographic jewellery may not pay too much attention to this blip. The serious photographers will probably make them pay for their mistake by by voting with their feet and wallets ... but the top end of town may not care too much and just throw that 'old' M9 into the corner and pop out to the nearest Leica Boutique and pick up an M240.
I'm a little torn. I'm glad that Leica have responded in a logical way and see that what they have done is correct but also aknowledge that it should heve been done sooner ... and who's to say they haven't known about this fatal sensor affliction for some time and have been keeping it under their hats until it became a real issue that couldn't be swept under the carpet any longer!
Ben Z
Veteran
I owned an M8 for 4 years, an M9 for 3 years. I never had them lock up, never had a shutter issue, never had a sensor issue. I've only had an M240 a short while but it seems to function 100% also. Actually I've owned about a dozen different Leica's since about 1973, and I can't recall ever having to have any of them repaired. Just a few old ones I bought that had been sitting in someone's closet needed a CLA to get the shutter speeds back on track. So either I'm a really lucky ******* or Leica's aren't as much of a reliability nightmare as all that. And I don't think it's luck given the number of losing lottery tickets I've torn up and tossed out over the years
noimmunity
scratch my niche
I have no idea to whom or to what your comments are addressed. The "unspecified other" is nothing if not a baiting tactic. Courage, honesty, integrity and care for others is expressed not by baiting, but by direct, patient address and communication. I've seen you do it and admire you at those times.
Having purchased, new, directly from Leica, both an M8 and an M-E, I do not fit your criteria ("interest"). X-ray doesn't either. And I don't think that Micheal or Jeff do, either. For myself, I am directly interested, precisely in the sense in which interest is economic as well as social. (For the record, nothing I have said concerns Leica's motivations; only what Leica has done).
The claim, as you state, that Leica have decided to make the M9 possible to use for years to come remains to be seen. It has the status of an assertion, not fact. As regards the assertion, I don't even concur with your understanding. Leica has given the impression that the M9 will be backed by a new guarantee for years to come, but I expect that in practice this will not be the case. Such is the documented fate of the M8. Also, the terms of use remain to be defined. Does 2-4 month turnaround in service count as use? No, I think that Leica's real strategy, which is not a motivation BTW, is to "encourage" upgrades. But the point is, neither you nor I know, at this point.
Shall this confusion of assertion with fact be taken as a sign of the psychological state of the person posting the message? It seems that by characterizing "unspecified others" with psychological terms such as "cathartic" you are inviting this kind of interpretation. I cannot imagine that you would like to see this rule applied to yourself. You have made many posts here and there that claim unrivaled superiority for this or that camera at a certain point in time. Are you inviting others to construe this as a reflection of your psychological state? "Frankly, one wonders why a person would take the time."
Having purchased, new, directly from Leica, both an M8 and an M-E, I do not fit your criteria ("interest"). X-ray doesn't either. And I don't think that Micheal or Jeff do, either. For myself, I am directly interested, precisely in the sense in which interest is economic as well as social. (For the record, nothing I have said concerns Leica's motivations; only what Leica has done).
The claim, as you state, that Leica have decided to make the M9 possible to use for years to come remains to be seen. It has the status of an assertion, not fact. As regards the assertion, I don't even concur with your understanding. Leica has given the impression that the M9 will be backed by a new guarantee for years to come, but I expect that in practice this will not be the case. Such is the documented fate of the M8. Also, the terms of use remain to be defined. Does 2-4 month turnaround in service count as use? No, I think that Leica's real strategy, which is not a motivation BTW, is to "encourage" upgrades. But the point is, neither you nor I know, at this point.
Shall this confusion of assertion with fact be taken as a sign of the psychological state of the person posting the message? It seems that by characterizing "unspecified others" with psychological terms such as "cathartic" you are inviting this kind of interpretation. I cannot imagine that you would like to see this rule applied to yourself. You have made many posts here and there that claim unrivaled superiority for this or that camera at a certain point in time. Are you inviting others to construe this as a reflection of your psychological state? "Frankly, one wonders why a person would take the time."
I guess it's a matter of perspective. You love and appreciate the M9 or you don't.
If you do you are very happy.
It doesn't really matter what Leica's motivation is. The action is what counts.
They have decided to make it possible to use the M9 for years to come.
If you don't care, you don't care and you can go on about how there is this flaw or the other with either the company or the camera. Frankly one wonders why a person would take the time.
I guess I could pop over to a M/43 forum and list all the reasons why it's not for me. It seems pointless however since I've already decided I'm not interested. LOL
I guess there is some cathartic aspect to trashing digital leica
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I also think it's rather ironic that Leica have managed to create two quite flawed cameras that will ultimately become door stops due to a lack of replacement parts. The M8 as we know now has no access to replacementt LCD screens and I can't help but wonder how long before they announce that replacement sensors are no longer available for the M9 and M-E?
leafster
Established
This too has been in my mind for quite sometime. I'm looking out for a M6TTL now and may eventually sell off my M9-P even though I really like the camera. It is my only camera for the past 3 years and the sensor was replaced 6 months ago.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
x-ray
Veteran
I purchased my new M9 and new lenses to use on commercial assignments shoot documentary work and personal images. In the roughly year and a half I owned it it spent either 27 or 28 weeks at Leica. Consider the depriciation of your gear over that time, simply not having it to use and the several hundred dollars to ship it. I figured I had around $20,000 invested in that equipment which would buy a reasonable car. Just say you bought a new car for that and in the first year and a half of ownership it was in the shop 27 weeks and you paid out of pocket $500 in towing. Let's also not forget you didn't even get a loaner. How would you feel. You'll you ever buy another car from that manufacture or recommend it. Oh yes, the company that made the car was quite aware of the issues that many of the same model had but never recalled or offered to correct the defect until an angry mob formed outside the corporate headquarters. Get my drift?
Folks it's your money and time but I'll never buy another new Leica product and never a leica digital product new or used.
Folks it's your money and time but I'll never buy another new Leica product and never a leica digital product new or used.
leafster
Established
Isn't this the company that used the catchy line:
Not for me. In my stand, I won't say no to digital or film. Is just different way of working. As of now, I hope to experience film.
Pioneer
Veteran
Even after the announcement of Leica's resolution, I still think my Bessa's are looking quite attractive. They take great pictures, use M lenses, and the price is definitely right.
MCTuomey
Veteran
That was in retrospect a significant mistake for you, wasn't it? So, you decided not to continue with what became a futile exercise, and get out of M gear. Makes sense, for you. Why you'd buy an M9 for professional work, in the aftermath of the M8's deficiencies and many of the M9's that soon became apparent after its release, is unclear to me, but you gave it a shot and got out. Your thing entirely.
You know, you don't need to convince anyone of the sense of your decision and your clear dislike of Leica's practices. It's personal and thus singular and respected.
You don't need to imply that someone like myself is less a man in an earlier post ("Be a man") for choosing a different gear allegiance and a different expectation and regard for Leica's products and behavior, either. Your insistence on your own rectitude as some larger generalizable truth seems shrill and harsh to my ear. But then, you know, I listen to a lot of fine jazz and blues and roots music, where harshness and negativity are avoided, and collaboration and improvisation are the norm. And, after all, we're only discussing matters as trivial as camera gear.
Exegetical excess, Jon. C'mon. Substitute "pleasure" or "glee" for cathartic and it's a simple observation. Sure, someone can find pleasure in praising one's own or another's camera, but strangely some folks seem to like to find fault in gear they don't like or own, and post same in sometimes harsh terms. That's hardly an invitation to psychologize. Or maybe it is, but more so re the latter than the former.
Pioneer
Veteran
Everytime I see your Avatar Mike, it reminds me I need to run down and pick up some Newcastle.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Mike, as you know, real men and women are those who respect and applaud others' choices while taking responsibility for their own ones. I think that you've always evinced that spirit here on RFF. More power to you!
Richard G
Veteran
I just had a lovely local beer called Bicycle Beer, and I'm going to get some more to celebrate the new longevity of my superseded digital Leicas. More importantly, I just got some film back, Rollei Retro 25 exposed in a Leica II with a slightly hazy 50 Elmar. I love old technology.
Michael Markey
Veteran
I never see you as a bitchy person Michael and have noted that your postings here and elsewhere are invariably considered and thoughtful.
I think Leica's attempt to blame users or suggest that improper sensor cleaning may have caused this issue is pretty standard fare for companies these days ... ultimately they are trying to protect their investors instead of their customers which I find repulsive.
I'm a little torn. I'm glad that Leica have responded in a logical way and see that what they have done is correct but also aknowledge that it should heve been done sooner ... and who's to say they haven't known about this fatal sensor affliction for some time and have been keeping it under their hats until it became a real issue that couldn't be swept under the carpet any longer!
I just can`t help it Keith
I`m pleased that it turned out the way it did .
I`m just not sure that I want to take the risk myself at this point.
I can`t see any alternative so I`ll just continue shooting my two film cameras and use the Merrills for digital.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I just can`t help it Keith
I`m pleased that it turned out the way it did .
I`m just not sure that I want to take the risk myself at this point.
I can`t see any alternative so I`ll just continue shooting my two film cameras and use the Merrills for digital.
So if Leica announced that they have developed a reliable (totally) replacement sensor for the M9 and ME and will fit it free of charge to any camera irrespective of age or shutter count ... would you be interested?
Just dreaming here! LOL