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.
I was looking at an M9 as the next move but find myself now more minded like XRay and Pioneer ... a rethink is in order.
Had Leica freely admitted the error from the outset instead of trying to blame the user for erroneous cleaning techniques and then compounded it by charging for replacement of what was clearly a defective component I might have been more forgiving.
To pretend that we have arrived at the present situation as a result of some kind of company largesse is fanciful.
They tried to bid people down for something which was their responsibility... tacky .
(Apologies if you feel this is a "bitch").
Nice try but fortunately it didn`t work.
This in no way affects my admiration for the concept of the RF.