Leica M9 FF-CCD corrosion - A most satisfactory conclusion

[VertovSvilova]

I don't know why they were refurbished but occasionally they do pop up.

fwiw, according to my local Leica vendor these are cameras that were faulty when sold and returned to the vendor for a replacement. The vendor returns the camera to Leica and gets credited. That's how vendors can immediately replace faulty cameras that aren't working correctly out of the box and not have the customer wait for a shipped replacement. There could be a variety of reasons they were faulty and not just a sensor issue. There's no a guarantee that the sensor was ever replaced on an official refurbished camera.

 

[Huss]

$6000 for a refurbished one is not a good deal anymore seeing a new, unmolestered one is now $6500.

 

[VertovSvilova]

http://www.yelp.com/biz/focus-camera-brooklyn

Research before you buy... :angel:

Reminds me of that great project on the Brooklyn camera and electronic 'stores' http://donwiss.com/pictures/BrooklynStores/

Story of it in the NYT here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/11/nyregion/11cameras.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[Pioneer]

Sorry. I was not trying to say that all these are trustworthy places to send your money. Just that refurbished units do become available at times. Photomoof is absolutely right. Always do your research. 🙂

 

[Huss]

This is what I don't get. Why is Leica still selling the M-E and the Monochrom, knowing full well that the sensors are faulty? They should be pulled from the shelves until the fix (newly designed sensors) has been made.
In the car business that is called a stop sell order, when there is a known defect.

For Leica to have acknowledged the fact that there is an issue, and yet continue to sell the product, well that is troubling. And would be easy pickings for a lawyer looking for a case.

 

[Pioneer]

Do we actually know that every sensor is faulty? What about those who are using their Leica cameras with no observable sensor problems.

Next, Leica did not announce a recall such as what you see in the automotive industry so I'm not sure that is an apples to apples comparison. Besides, it would be very hard to argue that the sensor problem is a safety issue, and this is usually the trigger for a stop sell order in the automotive business.

Finally, what will that lawyer be picking on. Leica has already agreed to repair the sensor problem free of charge if it occurs, whenever that happens and whoever owns the camera.

If you are a pro who depends on the camera for your livelihood then I suspect that Leica will work with you, by speeding up the repair and/or by providing a loaner in the interim.

 

[Huss]

Finally, what will that lawyer be picking on.

That Leica has acknowledged that they are selling a defective product, and still do so w/o providing any disclaimer as such. Fixing a defective sensor after the fact (4 months downtime in my case) provides little solace if you did not know about that going in. Blaming the customer for not 'doing the research' is not acceptable.

Here's the thing. My sensors have lasted less than a year each before showing this failure. You only see it (initially) shooting stopped down into a bright background. Let's be polite here, the majority of digital Leica shooters do not shoot this way so there most probably are a very large number of affected cameras out there that the owners are blissfully unaware of. As they shoot very occasionally. Most do not create large prints (if they print at all). Most may just post online to social media sites. Like the norm in digital photography.

My camera was repaired by Leica HQ, and that repair lasted 9 months. Why wouldn't I think that all these sensors are so affected? Did I get the special defective batch, twice?

Leica even sent out emails on July 4 addressing sensor spots by telling us not to stop down the lenses. Now that seems like it was an attempt to prevent this sensor delimitation issue from getting a full head of steam..

I still have that email, it seems almost cute now considering how things have unfolded. An excerpt:

"Unless absolutely necessary, avoid the use of small apertures. With apertures ranging from f/8 to f/22, for example, particles are rendered sharply by the sensor and become more noticeable in pictures. In contrast, shooting wide open often makes them disappear completely. By the way, as this avoids the diffraction effects associated with small apertures, the results will generally also be better.
• It is better not to stop down any further than f/4, particularly when capturing subjects with homogeneous areas, for example large expanses of sky."

I bolded the do not stop down any further than f/4. Because that is just priceless.

 

[btgc]

This is what I don't get. Why is Leica still selling the M-E and the Monochrom, knowing full well that the sensors are faulty? They should be pulled from the shelves until the fix (newly designed sensors) has been made.
In the car business that is called a stop sell order, when there is a known defect.

Camera is different from car not only in number of characters. Defect in a car can lead to injuries and death which would cost manufacturer a fortune if not bankruptcy under bad conditions.

Defect in a camera isn't critical, probably manual somewhere lists manufacturer isn't responsible if one misses his shot of a lifetime. Pros always will have backup and others will return to take their second chance.

 

[ian_watts]

• It is better not to stop down any further than f/4, particularly when capturing subjects with homogeneous areas, for example large expanses of sky."

I bolded the do not stop down any further than f/4. Because that is just priceless.

I agree, this emailed advice was not one of Leica's finest moments. In fact, it was halfwitted in the extreme ("do not stop down any further than f/4"🙄). Maybe Leica should have considered bringing out a new range of lenses with an aperture that only closes down to F4.😡

 

[Michael Markey]

I agree, this emailed advice was not one of Leica's finest moments. In fact, it was halfwitted in the extreme ("do not stop down any further than f/4"🙄). Maybe Leica should have considered bringing out a new range of lenses with an aperture that only closes down to F4.😡

Still Ian ... that must make the Noctilux and Sumilux lens cheaper ...no ? 😀

 

[Bille]

A D700 with a 28 isnt that much bigger than an M9!

http://camerasize.com/compare/#213,181

 

[gdmcclintock]

Finished with Leica

Finished with Leica

What am I to do with my M9? I had the sensor replaced 2 years ago (under warranty) and have not yet seen the symptoms described. Should these symptoms appear in a few months or years, will Leica replace it? Their message states free replacement of defective sensors; since mine does not yet appear to be defective, it does not make sense to send it to Leica only to have them examine it and send it back. Yet without a new, guaranteed sensor, it's resale value is significantly less than it should be.

After this sensor debacle, I will never again purchase a Leica.

 

[willie_901]

Do we actually know that every sensor is faulty? What about those who are using their Leica cameras with no observable sensor problems.

...

Every sensor is not faulty, i.e. delaminated.

At the same time, if the fault is directly related to exposure to humidity, every sensor will eventually suffer deamination defects. Sensor that are wet-cleaned often may fail more quickly. The problem with cleaning is not necessarily water absorbed by the hydroscopic cleaning fluids (alcohols), but rather very small, optically irrelevant scratches that could affect the cover glass protective coating. These initially insignificant scratches could be the starting points for delamination.

 

[Out to Lunch]

This is what I don't get. Why is Leica still selling the M-E and the Monochrom, knowing full well that the sensors are faulty? They should be pulled from the shelves until the fix (newly designed sensors) has been made.

Indeed, what's the score on this?

 

[_goodtimez]

Is the M8.2 Sensor affected ?

Is the M8.2 Sensor affected ?

Hi Folks,

I'm just thinking: is the M8.2 Sensor affected ?
Why yes or why no ?

 

[David_Manning]

I just simply never clean my sensor, and dust-spot my images. Hey, digital is the new film!

(Sarcasm intended) 🙂

 

[Huss]

Every sensor is not faulty, i.e. delaminated.

At the same time, if the fault is directly related to exposure to humidity, every sensor will eventually suffer deamination defects. Sensor that are wet-cleaned often may fail more quickly. The problem with cleaning is not necessarily water absorbed by the hydroscopic cleaning fluids (alcohols), but rather very small, optically irrelevant scratches that could affect the cover glass protective coating. These initially insignificant scratches could be the starting points for delamination.

I live in a very low humidity environment - Southern California - and have never wet cleaned my sensors. And yet I have had two fail after about 9 months use for each.
Leica should stop making excuses with humidity, wet cleaning etc. This doesn't affect other mfgs.

This "most satisfactory conclusion" is neither satisfactory nor a conclusion as nothing has been done apart from the release of a press statement. Sending your camera in for repair (using the same defective sensors) is no different than the result before this press release.

A satisfactory conclusion can only occur when/if the new sensor has been released and fitted into existing M9/M-E bodies, and we see that there is no longer an issue.

 

[Huss]

http://camerasize.com/compare/#213,181

Now you are confusing this argument with facts!

😉

 

[Lss]

Leica should stop making excuses with humidity, wet cleaning etc. This doesn't affect other mfgs.

It seems to be the Schott glass used on the M9 sensor that has nice optical properties, but poor resistance against humidity. Sensor assemblies that do not feature this choice of material will not have the same issues.

 

[f16sunshine]

This is turning into the most combed over, boring, overblown subject ever posted on RFF. 😛