Leica M9 FF-CCD corrosion on sensors

As a M9 user and long time Leica customer I am now really worried.

I've just been to the Leica website where they used to have FAQ page about cleaning the sensor but has now disappeared.

Like others on this thread I'm considering giving up on digital M. I love my M9 but cannot justify having the body devalue from £5k to £0 through no fault of my own. I was holding out for the next model, but by then my Leica dealer will probably charge me to take the M9 off my hands when I ask for a part exchange.
 
EdwardKaraa said:
I bought my M9 new from an authorized Leica dealer and it already showed 5-10 delamination bubbles that I mistook for oil spots. They multiplied to around 100 in less than a year. I think it is irrelevant if the sensor has been cleaned by the user, ambient humidity at which the camera has been stored well before it is actually sold may kickstart the corrosion. The filter is exposed to ambient humidity as soon as the protective cover is removed and the sensor installed in the camera body.
Click to expand...

They fixed it pretty fast for you, if I remember. :)
 
We don't know the totals, but it seems safe to say 50,000 or more of cameras with these sensors have been sold. The reported sensor problems are only a very small percentage of that. Leica has generally done a good job of handling any defects at little or no cost, though perhaps not always as quickly as hoped for. Its all too easy for forums to blow problems way out of proportion.

Obviously Leica management did not expect such problems and is still working on the best ways to handle the situation to their customer's satisfaction. Time will tell how this work out, but its hard to believe Leica will lets its customers down.

Stephen
 
Charlie, I send it in after 1 year, but I should have send it earlier as I was spending too much time cloning out these inexplicably resistant spots that couldn't be removed with wet cleaning.

Stephen, I definitely do not think it's a small percentage. As I mentioned before, every M9 derivative I know of in Thailand has had this problem. However, it seems the heat and humidity in southeast Asia may have accelerated the corrosion.
 
And what else then letting customers down is their proclamation on sensor issue?
And removing section on wet cleaning from www is so lame in digital age.

CameraQuest said:
We don't know the totals, but it seems safe to say 50,000 or more of cameras with these sensors have been sold. The reported sensor problems are only a very small percentage of that. Leica has generally done a good job of handling any defects at little or no cost, though perhaps not always as quickly as hoped for. Its all too easy for forums to blow problems way out of proportion.

Obviously Leica management did not expect such problems and is still working on the best ways to handle the situation to their customer's satisfaction. Time will tell how this work out, but its hard to believe Leica will lets its customers down.

Stephen
Click to expand...
 
I do hate to be a wet blanket on all this fun, but warranties do expire. As it is Leica has been pretty generous with their warranty periods. And even an M3 has problems.

I like this camera enough that if the sensor does get to the point where I just can't clean things up satisfactorily in post, then I'll just send it off to Leica for a new one. Even if I have to pay for it myself.
 
Sucks to be hit by this issue at some point in the future, but I won't expect I can fix everything for free, either it's due to design flaw (or semi-flaw) or not.

I have to have my scuba regulators serviced every year (some people do every 2 years). I have to have my mechanical watches overhauled every 3 to 5 years. My Ducati will likely cost me more than the purchase price of the bike itself in 3-5 years of ownership if I'm not super lucky. It will suck to pay up, but I don't expect the manufacturers to pay for everything.

If Leica comes back and says "we can't repair your Monochrom any more" in next 3-5 years like they did with M8 (I hope they learned their lesson!), that's a different story, but I'll accept paying some to keep using the gear after warranty expires.
 
I’ve been following this thread and the one at the Leica forum with interest because I have had an M9 since it was introduced back in the autumn of 09. Has it really been 5 years?

And yes, over those years I’ve read of the problems that owners have had, some of them real horror stories of undependable cameras with multiple service needs and extremely slow repair times. Fortunately I have not been one of those (knock on wood). I do not use my camera professionally, and don’t have a track record of 100,000 exposures. I understand that the camera does have its short comings with slow file processing, and some software hang-ups that I live with because for what it is; a FF rangefinder that works basically like the film Leica RFs I have loved since I started in photography, takes my Leica RF lenses without problems, and provides the basic functions of a digital camera.

A few months ago I sent my camera into Leica Japan for a sensor cleaning (I only blow my sensor and always let Leica service do the major cleanings). I didn’t know anything was wrong with my camera’s sensor, but they wrote back that they were going to change my sensor /shutter unit, replace the camera cover and make any adjustments. A couple days over two weeks later my camera was back in my hands as good as new and all repairs done free of any charges. ‘Not bad’ was my thought for a camera a couple years out of warranty.

Now I am reading that Leica is acknowledging that the sensor of the M9, M9-P and MM have a manufactured defect that potentially effects all cameras, and even the replacement sensor will have since its the same part. The camera’s environment and effects of user cleaning are pointed out as being the main cause of the sensor developing a problem, but I’ve not heard of any other digital sensor with this issue given the same environment/cleaning concerns, or just the fact its a few years old.

I understand Leica couldn’t foresee this problem when they choose the sensor for the M9, and I do understand this doesn’t help with the past repair problems that many users had. The Company does seem to want to address the issue in a reasonable way, but the bottom line is the sensor long term dependability is not right, and for a camera that costs as much as this and coming from a company that markets its historic product dependability so heavily in promotion, it does make a M9 buyer/user like me ‘uncomfortable’ that the camera will be a ‘brick’ at some point before I want it to.

For now I’ll be using my M9 and I can say lately I’ve been even appreciating it more for what it is and why I originally bought it. It still makes great photographs. It has a ‘renewed warranty’ with the replaced sensor, but if the times comes with the outlined future repair time-discount plan for another replacement sensor I’ll have to use the ‘throw good money after bad’ thought.

I did read something about Leica offering a trade-in upgrade to the M240, but probably out of my price and I don’t want to be ‘forced’ into an upgrade. They seem to be trying to get ahead of this now with some policy announcements. but the snow-balling effect of the problem and reaction to it by costumers/users seems like all the makings of class action lawsuit.
 
coelacanth said:
I have to have my scuba regulators serviced every year (some people do every 2 years). I have to have my mechanical watches overhauled every 3 to 5 years. My Ducati will likely cost me more than the purchase price of the bike itself in 3-5 years of ownership if I'm not super lucky. It will suck to pay up, but I don't expect the manufacturers to pay for everything.
Click to expand...

While it's understood that certain products will need servicing and can wear out, a product defect is a completely different matter. When you bought those products, it was already understood by you that the product required regular service (or even an overhaul) at a particular point in its service, and you knew the cost of ownership at the time you bought the product. With the M9/ME/MM, it wasn't understood by the buyer that the sensor might fail early in its life due to a defect.

Those who say all products don't last forever, or that all warranties time out, are mixing apples and oranges here. We normally understand the life expectancy of certain objects we buy and we know the cost of ownership over time, and so we buy them accordingly. But this is a manufacturing defect that wasn't part of the initial purchasing decision.
 
So far I've only heard of those withsensor issues Leica has made the repairs free of charge and then extended the warranty another 3 years. If you're not happy with that solution and then may I suggest selling your Leica gear and moving to another system where maybe you'll be happier.

Or do you expect Leica to hand out new cameras to everyone that owns an M9?
 
Duane Pandorf said:
So far I've only heard of those withsensor issues Leica has made the repairs free of charge and then extended the warranty another 3 years. If you're not happy with that solution and then may I suggest selling your Leica gear and moving to another system where maybe you'll be happier.

Or do you expect Leica to hand out new cameras to everyone that owns an M9?
Click to expand...

That is not really nice to say Duane. Having a bad day?

By the way, I got 6 months warranty on my new sensor last year. I understand now it is 1 year not 3 year, but only on the sensor.
 
EdwardKaraa said:
It is interesting that "the suede" member on FM forum who is a optical scientist and one of the founders of the old photodo website, has mentioned several times, and way before this issue became public, that the M9 uses a very cheap sensor glass cover and filter stack. He was wondering why Leica decided to go cheap on this one as there are way more efficient thin IR filters available for more money.
Click to expand...

For some time Leica has been owned by investors or an investor and not the Leitz family. No doubt the Leitz family took a great deal of pride in the quality of the products they produced as do many of the employs today. Investors are a different animal. Investors are interested in the bottom line and everything else is secondary. The idea is to produce a product at the lowest price and sell at the highest or at least sell in huge quantities. Leica will never sell huge quantities so it produce at the lowest price and sell at the highest. Leica has the brand recognition carrying over from the past and they've created a lifestyle around the product much like Apple has around their products. It's all about marketing and perception.

I've questioned in my mind whether the choices were poor design choices or corporate penny pinching to maximize profits. I suspect it's the penny pinching. It appears they used a cheap sensor or at least cover that was marginal, shallow inadequate buffer and poor quality rear lcd screen that was almost useless. There's also been reported shutter problems and wonder if a cheaper inferior shutter was used.
 
x-ray said:
For some time Leica has been owned by investors or an investor and not the Leitz family. No doubt the Leitz family took a great deal of pride in the quality of the products they produced as do many of the employs today. Investors are a different animal. Investors are interested in the bottom line and everything else is secondary. The idea is to produce a product at the lowest price and sell at the highest or at least sell in huge quantities. Leica will never sell huge quantities so it produce at the lowest price and sell at the highest. Leica has the brand recognition carrying over from the past and they've created a lifestyle around the product much like Apple has around their products. It's all about marketing and perception.

I've questioned in my mind whether the choices were poor design choices or corporate penny pinching to maximize profits. I suspect it's the penny pinching. It appears they used a cheap sensor or at least cover that was marginal, shallow inadequate buffer and poor quality rear lcd screen that was almost useless. There's also been reported shutter problems and wonder if a cheaper inferior shutter was used.
Click to expand...

Even when owned by the Leitz family I doubt that manufacturing was allowed to spend money unaccountably. Cost controls are a fact of life in any manufacturing process. I seriously doubt that the fact that Leica is now owned by an investment consortium changes that fact.
 
VertovSvilova said:
While it's understood that certain products will need servicing and can wear out, a product defect is a completely different matter. When you bought those products, it was already understood by you that the product required regular service (or even an overhaul) at a particular point in its service, and you knew the cost of ownership at the time you bought the product. With the M9/ME/MM, it wasn't understood by the buyer that the sensor might fail early in its life due to a defect.

Those who say all products don't last forever, or that all warranties time out, are mixing apples and oranges here. We normally understand the life expectancy of certain objects we buy and we know the cost of ownership over time, and so we buy them accordingly. But this is a manufacturing defect that wasn't part of the initial purchasing decision.
Click to expand...

Well, it's half-n-half. There are safety recalls for motorcycles, but there are plenty of "defects" that the manufacturer won't honor free fix. Same can be said for pretty much everything. by definition, warranties mostly warrant the quality and craftsmanship within whatever given years. If there was a defect on my mechanical watch 2 years after warranty period, I need to be prepared to pay up to fix it. Sometimes the company will do goodwill service free of charge, and Leica (at least NJ) is quite well known for that. That said, I'm prepared to pay when the time comes. And compared to european cars and motorcycles, Leica's repair charge is quite generous. :p
 
coelacanth said:
Well, it's half-n-half. There are safety recalls for motorcycles, but there are plenty of "defects" that the manufacturer won't honor free fix. Same can be said for pretty much everything. by definition, warranties mostly warrant the quality and craftsmanship within whatever given years. If there was a defect on my mechanical watch 2 years after warranty period, I need to be prepared to pay up to fix it. Sometimes the company will do goodwill service free of charge, and Leica (at least NJ) is quite well known for that. That said, I'm prepared to pay when the time comes. And compared to european cars and motorcycles, Leica's repair charge is quite generous. :p
Click to expand...

I always thought I'd at some point own an M9, to the point of keeping a couple of lenses that don't work on my x-pro but would on the M9, but now I think it's unlikely I'd spend any serious money on a camera with such a track record, and it's this I see as being the big problem for a lot of owners, even if your camera hasn't developed a problem, it has to have an effect on it's resale value, which up until now has been pretty good for a digital camera.
I'd like to ask anyone who so far has taken the view that this is being blown out of proportion, if they had a friend unaware of the issue, who was about to shell out over £6000 on a monochrome M, would they feel compelled to give the friend a heads up about the possible issue, and this is the thing, it undermines the reputation of the product.
I think with other manufacturers it largely depends on how big the problem is, and perhaps if it can be proved to be a design fault or not. I once had a VW Passat that I bought secondhand and beyond the milage that would have given some warranty, nor was it bought from VW. After a few months of ownership I discovered there was a lot of water swilling around under the cabins floor, submerging the loom of electrical wires that run the length of the car. This was caused by a design fault with the AC unit leaking condensed water into, instead of out of the car. VW replaced the loom which required gutting the cars cabin and re-running and connecting the hundreds of wires that make up the loom, an enormous undertaking, it was away for about three weeks and I was provided a courtesy car, all free of charge.
The point being that VW must have taken the view that the cost was worth the longer term confidence of the consumer, but importantly they have the resources to ride these things out.
I doubt Leica could afford to keep replacing all M9 cameras with new sensors as they fail, even if by rights they ought to. This isn't wear and tear, or an ongoing service issue, it's a car engine failing after 20,000 miles. I feel sorry for Leica, they haven't had the best of luck with their digital M's. they must be very frustrated with their suppliers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom