Michael Markey
Veteran
There is an open letter to the company on Luf ,basically voicing disatisfaction with their current response.
Some feel that it contravenes existing EU consumer protection legislation.
Its a great shame but they need to resolve matters equitably.
Some feel that it contravenes existing EU consumer protection legislation.
Its a great shame but they need to resolve matters equitably.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
True enough Fred. I was going to type that Leica promotes its cameras (M system specifically) as being reliable but, you know, in looking over the Leica website, I couldn't find much in the way that they claim the system is, at all, reliable.
The best I could find was a small blurb on the M(240):
Maybe they mean to say "Only the M(240) is reliable" ? But even in that small blurb no where does it actually say "reliable"... it only infers reliability...
Maybe that's the problem. We have all been led to believe that they are reliable when they are, in fact, not so much. . .
Cheers,
Dave
Jack Sparrow
Well-known
They claimed as far back as the M8 already that these digital cameras were built to last, even upgradable with new technology as it became available. Leica back pedaled on that promise fairly soon after the M8's launch and leading up to the M9.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Even though this is completely about the M9 (the issues wrt cracked sensor screens and such) it's making me feel like I should just give up on the M(240) I have and head towards my Sony A7 (which I do adore and glad I kept).
*sigh* - I like the M(240) and it actually produces lovely files (and images are what I would expect and don't require me to do a lot of post processing) but the way Leica has handled this (and other things in the past) is completely making me feel like I've been duped again by their attempt at digital. I will love them for their glass and their film bodies but always be suspect of the digital bodies... always.
Cheers,
Dave
*sigh* - I like the M(240) and it actually produces lovely files (and images are what I would expect and don't require me to do a lot of post processing) but the way Leica has handled this (and other things in the past) is completely making me feel like I've been duped again by their attempt at digital. I will love them for their glass and their film bodies but always be suspect of the digital bodies... always.
Cheers,
Dave
That's the thing... the A7 (I use the A7r) is such a great camera... but it has no emotional appeal. That's where the Leicas come into play... they are just sexy. You have the best of both worlds IMO.
Michael Markey
Veteran
xleic
Member
Turning Lemons into Lemonade
Turning Lemons into Lemonade
Personally I think the new M9 sensor problems are a great opportunity for Leica to increase sales and increase customer satisfaction.
As it makes no sense to invest Leica R&D into new sensors for a discontinued camera, an overly generous upgrade for ALL discontinued digital Leica M bodies, plus say a guaranteed upgrade program from the date of purchase for the current cameras using the old chip to the M240 sensor cameras is probably the best way to go.
Stephen
Turning Lemons into Lemonade
Personally I think the new M9 sensor problems are a great opportunity for Leica to increase sales and increase customer satisfaction.
As it makes no sense to invest Leica R&D into new sensors for a discontinued camera, an overly generous upgrade for ALL discontinued digital Leica M bodies, plus say a guaranteed upgrade program from the date of purchase for the current cameras using the old chip to the M240 sensor cameras is probably the best way to go.
Stephen
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I would agree but I somehow doubt (although that doesn't mean it can't happen) that Leica will provide a "free" upgrade because of this. One of their "solutions" for this conundrum was indeed to upgrade the camera to the M(240) but there was no mention of "Oh.. and we'll cover some/all of the cost for that because we love our clients".
Cheers,
Dave
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
To be fair, and unless you can point it out somewhere here in this thread, I don't believe anyone stated that the Sony's were "reliable" - the comments were that Leica's were "supposed to be" reliable.
Thanks for playing though. . .
Cheers,
Dave
Pioneer
Veteran
I haven't experienced any noticeable trouble that I know of yet, but my M9 is back with Leica NJ for its annual cleaning. I guess we'll find out.
But to be honest, I have been getting a bit of a bad taste with digital even before this and have started reversing my tracks. The first digital I really enjoyed working with was the M9. I'll stay with it for as long as I can but I recently received my M-A. However, I do hope that Leica is able to work this out because I know that producing film cameras will not keep the firm afloat.
But to be honest, I have been getting a bit of a bad taste with digital even before this and have started reversing my tracks. The first digital I really enjoyed working with was the M9. I'll stay with it for as long as I can but I recently received my M-A. However, I do hope that Leica is able to work this out because I know that producing film cameras will not keep the firm afloat.
Ok, not sure of what your point is... the A7r works for me just as the M9 works for many around here.
gb hill
Veteran
I say we just bring back the vacuum tube. A vacuum tube camera could be so beneficial to you all who live in colder climates. Gripping the camera would keep your hands so warm & toasty & tubes are so easily replaceable.
x-ray
Veteran
I say we just bring back the vacuum tube. A vacuum tube camera could be so beneficial to you all who live in colder climates. Gripping the camera would keep your hands so warm & toasty & tubes are so easily replaceable.
How about the kerosene version with kick starter?
gb hill
Veteran
Too bad ol Popcorn Sutton is gone. He could of made a version much more potent than kerosene. Speak of the "Still Photograph"
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
No matter what Leica claims, no one should expect a digital M to last for a lifetime. Like every other digital camera, it should be expected to be upgraded every 3 years, and up to 6 years if one can live with an almost obsolete performance. The M9 was already obsolete 5 years old technology even at its launch, it's quite amazing Leica still manage to sell yet another version 5 years later.
I guess people want to decide when it becomes obsolete for themselves and not have it crap out before they are done using it. The bottom line is that the M9 is still one of the better solutions for M lenses in digital, so its a unique situation vs. typical DSLRs.
Huss
Veteran
"Obsolete" means nothing to me as long as I get the results I want.
And I do with my M-E. But what does matter is if it works. And mine needed a new sensor after 9 months of careful use with zero sensor cleaning. I had to wait 3-4 months for that.
I do feel that if I am dropping $5500 on a product, I should expect and receive one of the highest quality and reliability. I do not think I am asking much considering the lack of feature set compared to Japanese cameras. There is far less there, so there should be far less to go wrong.
We should stop making excuses for Leica being a small company etc as that is why they charge their huge prices. It's not as if they are a small company AND are asking Japanese camera money.
Why did I buy my M-E in the first place? Because it was the only digital camera on the market that was as close to a film camera made. I wanted an optical VF specifically designed for MF lenses, I wanted as few features as possible (which should increase reliability), and I wanted a simple interface. Leica is the only one who offers that. They should have kept the mechanics in-house, but outsourced the electronics to someone who knows what they are doing. There is a reason Nikon uses Sony sensors.
Pioneer
Veteran
But why? Why do we have to update all the time? If we decide we want, then that's great. But I have a Pentax I bought back in 2006 that still takes great pictures. I use it as my SLR digital and I see no need to update it.
Theoretically that was my intent for the M9. I did not buy it with the intention of upgrading in 3 years. For crying out loud, the Pentax cost less than a 5th of what the M9 cost. You would think that it would be able to last at least as long.
I think this idea of needing to upgrade every 5 minutes is hogwash. These are complex cameras and it takes me awhile to get comfortable with them. Right about the time I start feeling comfortable I am expected to upgrade?? That has never been the Leica philosophy to the best of my knowledge. If that is what it has become then it is certainly time for me to move on.
Jack Sparrow
Well-known
Think of digital Ms as the antithesis of the modern digital camera. Instead, a simple one, free of all the feature bloat of the status quo. The fact that it has nothing but basic controls. This is presumably a big reason why many buy one. Therefore, it is not subject to the constant upgrade cycle. If you're happy with why you bought it in the first place, and it performs well for you in that regard - there's really no need to.
The camera is built to such high standards, why should one not expect it to last, provided it is cared for reasonably well? A digital sensor, unlike a mechanical piece, should not "wear out" (or corrode).
The camera is built to such high standards, why should one not expect it to last, provided it is cared for reasonably well? A digital sensor, unlike a mechanical piece, should not "wear out" (or corrode).