For all you know Jim is ill or on leave.
Why not email the general information email address?
Stephen
Pioneer
Veteran
Just as a small note of information. I used the general information address a couple of days ago and got a response from Leica USA on that same day.
Of course that is probably too quick for a response and leaves no reason to whinge about Leica. :bang:
And by the way, just out of curiosity you realize, since you let your camera lie around until it was in this bad of shape, why is it suddenly so urgent that you get in contact with Leica?
MCTuomey
Veteran
I have an M9 and an MM in for inspection and service at Leica NJ, since just prior to Christmas. Customer Care has been a model of responsivity, allowing for the holiday closure. I would suggest phone calls if your e-mails have not had responses. Not sure why a "record of correspondence" is so important versus actually making productive contact with Leica NJ service reps.
Whether you choose to remain a Leica user is irrelevant to the service issue. If your sensor is corroded, you will have a choice between sensor replacement or an upgrade credit toward an M240. Meaning you'll end up with either a repaired M9 or a new M240, either of which you can subsequently choose to sell, of course, and buy whatever else suits you.
VertovSvilova
Well-known
Despite all the problems with Leica products and QC issues, etc., I have to say that their customer service is excellent. When Carmen was there, she was always on top of things and would reply right away and I doubt anything has changed since she left. And once with just one email from me, they sent a full set of replacement leatherette coverings for a Leica X2 for free, which I installed myself (the covering was damaged from my own misuse and not under warranty.)
But don't forget that there are no doubt lots of 'inquiries' such as yours now and I'm sure that Leica NJ and Leica AG are also still communicating on protocol over the issue. You didn't say specifically what you're inquiring about, but the Leica sensor policy as it stands now is posted on their website.
Sometimes emails can get lost in the recipient's junk/spam box. And if you got an auto-response that they are backed up, uh well, then they are backed up. Give them a call. Not sure why you are so concerned about an email record, but if you're needing a sensor replacement why not simply call and ask for the current turnaround time, etc.. They will tell you what to do and you'll get a receipt and repair sheet when they get your camera. You need to have a bit of trust and think positive. They will take care of you....
But don't forget that there are no doubt lots of 'inquiries' such as yours now and I'm sure that Leica NJ and Leica AG are also still communicating on protocol over the issue. You didn't say specifically what you're inquiring about, but the Leica sensor policy as it stands now is posted on their website.
Sometimes emails can get lost in the recipient's junk/spam box. And if you got an auto-response that they are backed up, uh well, then they are backed up. Give them a call. Not sure why you are so concerned about an email record, but if you're needing a sensor replacement why not simply call and ask for the current turnaround time, etc.. They will tell you what to do and you'll get a receipt and repair sheet when they get your camera. You need to have a bit of trust and think positive. They will take care of you....
MCTuomey
Veteran
+1 And Roxana Lynch now maintains and continues the standard. She's been great on my recent service needs.
whatever
Established
All good questions, my reply.
All good questions, my reply.
I never said the camera was laying around. The sensor started peeling when I was on a shoot over a period of one week.
I don't consider a over 3 week request for a E Mail reply is so urgent.
The question to Leica was, is the M9 sensor being recalled for sensor replacement? I now have the answer, my question was answered today.
First the following statement is a copy of a notice from a official Leica posting. You may have seen it, maybe others haven't.
FROM LEICA :
Important Information Concerning the CCD Sensors of the Leica M9 / M9-P / M Monochrom / M-E
In some cases, particularly when using the camera models Leica M9, M9*P, M Monochrom or M*E with smaller apertures (5.6*22), effects caused by corrosion of the sensor glass may be encountered. Leica offers a free replacement service for the CCD sensors of cameras affected by this problem as a goodwill arrangement. This goodwill arrangement applies regardless of the age of the camera and also covers sensors that have already been replaced in the past. Customers who have already been charged for the replacement of a sensor affected by this problem will receive a refund.
We have now identified the problem and are currently concentrating our efforts on finding a permanent technical solution. The marks on images mentioned earlier are related to the properties of the CCD sensor. The sensors are equipped with a specially coated IR filter cover glass to ensure optimum imaging performance. Should this coating layer be damaged, corrosion effects that alter the filter surface may begin to appear after several years.
http://en.leica-camera.com/World-of...ortant-Information-Concerning-the-CCD-Sensors
1/3
The answer to me from Mr Jim Nooney.
Quote: Leica has not issued a sensor recall for M9 cameras. If customer’s cameras are exhibiting signs of sensor corrosion then the customer can send their camera in to be examined by one of our technicians.
Now isn't that easy to understand. He did apologize for being late for my reply. It really is nice when any company representative replies to a request for information from any customer in a timely manner. As I said in my original posting I have been a faithful Leica user for a bunch of years. I was just very surprised it would take 3 weeks to answer a simple question, that's all. In the past all of my correspondence was exchanged over night.
I hope this clears up this issue, I am certainly satisfied.
All good questions, my reply.
I never said the camera was laying around. The sensor started peeling when I was on a shoot over a period of one week.
I don't consider a over 3 week request for a E Mail reply is so urgent.
The question to Leica was, is the M9 sensor being recalled for sensor replacement? I now have the answer, my question was answered today.
First the following statement is a copy of a notice from a official Leica posting. You may have seen it, maybe others haven't.
FROM LEICA :
Important Information Concerning the CCD Sensors of the Leica M9 / M9-P / M Monochrom / M-E
In some cases, particularly when using the camera models Leica M9, M9*P, M Monochrom or M*E with smaller apertures (5.6*22), effects caused by corrosion of the sensor glass may be encountered. Leica offers a free replacement service for the CCD sensors of cameras affected by this problem as a goodwill arrangement. This goodwill arrangement applies regardless of the age of the camera and also covers sensors that have already been replaced in the past. Customers who have already been charged for the replacement of a sensor affected by this problem will receive a refund.
We have now identified the problem and are currently concentrating our efforts on finding a permanent technical solution. The marks on images mentioned earlier are related to the properties of the CCD sensor. The sensors are equipped with a specially coated IR filter cover glass to ensure optimum imaging performance. Should this coating layer be damaged, corrosion effects that alter the filter surface may begin to appear after several years.
http://en.leica-camera.com/World-of...ortant-Information-Concerning-the-CCD-Sensors
1/3
The answer to me from Mr Jim Nooney.
Quote: Leica has not issued a sensor recall for M9 cameras. If customer’s cameras are exhibiting signs of sensor corrosion then the customer can send their camera in to be examined by one of our technicians.
Now isn't that easy to understand. He did apologize for being late for my reply. It really is nice when any company representative replies to a request for information from any customer in a timely manner. As I said in my original posting I have been a faithful Leica user for a bunch of years. I was just very surprised it would take 3 weeks to answer a simple question, that's all. In the past all of my correspondence was exchanged over night.
I hope this clears up this issue, I am certainly satisfied.
SuperUJ
Well-known
+1 on Roxana Lynch (through the general service email address). I got responses from her all within the same day on the service of my M9.
John
cosmonaut
Well-known
The truly sad part, love Leica or hate Leica, this is going to cost them a lot of money to fix. Which means higher prices, less R&D and falling behind on future projects and releases.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
True but it should also gain them more sales as people realise how noble they are...
Regards, David
PS and think of the R&D needed for the others to start making film cameras again now that Leica have started a trend and are out at the front, again.
ktmrider
Well-known
In the long run, the goodwill generated by Leica for handling this problem will make up for their costs. I have an M9 in for service (CLA) and hope to get it back in the next week.
willie_901
Veteran
Did Leica have a choice regardless of cost?
Remember the initial response (which escalated the existence of M CCD sensor corrosion from niche photography Forums to global social media feeds) was an official announcement from Leica of a pro-rated CCD sensor-replacement policy and price list.
Leica quickly reversed this decision. But their initial policy was not particularly motivated by goodwill.
Remember the initial response (which escalated the existence of M CCD sensor corrosion from niche photography Forums to global social media feeds) was an official announcement from Leica of a pro-rated CCD sensor-replacement policy and price list.
Leica quickly reversed this decision. But their initial policy was not particularly motivated by goodwill.
Luke_Miller
Established
I don't know Leica's motivation, but my read of the available information suggests Leica initially believed "relatively few" sensors were affected and that user behavior (improper wet cleaning) was a factor in the failures. In that light I think the initial response was reasonable. As Leica became aware of the full scope of the issue and determined that user behavior was not a factor they revised their policy.
VertovSvilova
Well-known
I'd like to believe that, too. But sensor issues were happening in late 2012 and no doubt Leica started to take note of the issue. I'm certain that like any manufacturer they were making notes of how many cameras were having these issues. And many users were stating that they were surprised that their cameras were having sensors replaced when the cameras were in for unrelated issues (users that hadn't noticed an issue with their sensor.)
Then in July of 2014, Leica emailed information to owners about 'proper' sensor cleaning protocols. They certainly realized by then that fluid could accelerate sensor damage (and apparently also get into the edges of the cover glass/sensor sandwich.) This was a bit unusual since modern digital camera sensors are often cleaned without any special precautions out of the norm (e.g., methanol and swabs, etc..) The July notice stated that only 'non-contact' cleaning was to be done with these CCD sensors (again, no mention of any problems with the sensors themselves.)
On November 20th, they fully admitted the sensor corrosion issues and posted the official "pro-rated CCD sensor-replacement policy and price list" that willie_901 mentions in his post. There was a lot of immediate complaining and questioning of that policy. On November 26th, they posted another 'sensor cleaning' announcement that attempted to suggest that cleaning the sensor was the problem despite that many users said they had never cleaned their corroded sensors. On the 10th of December, Stefan Daniel finally posted that Leica would replace any corroded CCD sensor free of charge but only after the "Open Letter to Leica Camera AG" was posted by the German members of LUF. That 'open letter' to Leica AG was posted on December 3rd, before Leica's final and current policy. That letter definitely got Leica's attention.
I seriously doubt that Leica wasn't aware of that something was going on with these sensors as problem cameras were coming in for repair. It was good what Leica finally chose to do but it appears they had been 'testing the waters' when they made the initial November 20th announcement after noting the comments by users on LUF. But they never mentioned the spots/corrosion issue in their earlier 'proper cleaning' email and they made the final 'free sensor' repair only after the 'open letter' by the German owners which demanded specific reparation (and the EU has stiffer consumer product laws.)
But nonetheless, it was appropriate that Leica listened to the discontent voiced by their customer base and made good. And that is appreciated, I'm sure.
Luke_Miller
Established
Regardless of how we got to the current policy I think it represents the best outcome for both Leica and the affected customers. I suspect the original position would have created a tsunami of cameras being sent in to beat the deadline for free or subsidized sensor replacement. Worst case this would have exhausted replacement sensor stocks and required Leica to order more of the existing senors while at the same time trying to develop one not subject to the issue.
Now those users with sensor corrosion that does not yet affect their images can afford to wait on the "new" sensor design before sending their body in for repair. I sent my M9 in for replacement as the sensor was getting pretty bad, but my Monochrom is in the very early stages and I will hold on.
Now those users with sensor corrosion that does not yet affect their images can afford to wait on the "new" sensor design before sending their body in for repair. I sent my M9 in for replacement as the sensor was getting pretty bad, but my Monochrom is in the very early stages and I will hold on.
ian_watts
Ian Watts
Leica revised their policy because they had underestimated how unpopular a policy of charging (on a sliding scale, depending upon age) would be. That revision (u-turn) had nothing to do with any subsequent discovery or findings relating to the number of affected sensors and/or user behaviour.
willie_901
Veteran
So in your view it is highly likely Leica's knowledge of the rate of failure, vulnerability of every single sensor in the field,and true cause of the failure changed dramatically in less than two weeks?
Luke_Miller
Established
I think it occurred over a period much longer than two weeks. In early July 2014 Leica published their advisory regarding contact cleaning. So it seems reasonable to believe they have been concerned with this issue for some time. I don't believe anyone is happy with the situation, but I think Leica has responded responsibly. Could they have come to the current policy more quickly? Possibly, but there are a lot of stakeholders that must come to agreement first - and that takes some time. Just my opinion.
Clark.EE
Well-known
X Leica Clown now in remission
X Leica Clown now in remission
I used to hate the red dot (M8 problems).
After some expensive rehab, (Fuji)
I am now in remission.
I don't think I have posted anything inflammatory on this forum for at least 6 weeks now.
Let the Leica clowns spend their money as they see fit I say!
X Leica Clown now in remission
I used to hate the red dot (M8 problems).
After some expensive rehab, (Fuji)
I am now in remission.
I don't think I have posted anything inflammatory on this forum for at least 6 weeks now.
Let the Leica clowns spend their money as they see fit I say!