PKR
Veteran
Well I guess the don't blame line should be in question. Agreed. I just see a lot of this counterfeit chip thing. It's almost impossible to detect some of them. They typically test good but (MTBF) fail early. Nikon is a company who like making all of the items that go into their cameras. The word is that Sony isn't making the current "large sensor". It looks like it being done in a Nikon fab or outsourced to another vendor. You might look around the web for some news. There was some Sony news on this topic, but I couldn't find it today.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/nikon-could-produce-future-aps-c-sensor-without-sonys-help/
http://dptnt.com/2010/08/nikon-producing-its-own-image-sensors-for-dslr/
Last edited:
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I believe that Japanese companies have a long history of outside suppliers both large and small feeding the primary builder/assembler of a product. If you operate in an ISO certified environment then your outside suppliers are required to meet your standard also. That, in theory at least, should make the problem of counterfeit/sub standard parts less of a problem. I would be surprised if any manufacturer of a consumer product runs a totally in house product build these days.
Bob
bwcolor
Veteran
I might be way off here, but I don't know that it is reliability that keeps Leica off the pro map, but rather the fact that the less expensive models are rangefinders (not the plus that it was forty years ago) and the professional support just hasn't been there. I sent my 1DMKIII in for CLA and it was back in no time. The uncertainty of repair cost and turn around time makes it difficult to depend on a digital leica.
I'm sure that Leica will get you back up and running on their dime. Sorry that you have been so terribly snake bit with your M9(s).
I'm sure that Leica will get you back up and running on their dime. Sorry that you have been so terribly snake bit with your M9(s).
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Given the number of pros (albeit not in the league of Canon and Nikon, but that is logical given the type of camera) on both LUF and GetDPI is quite amazing, so I think your premisse is off. And Leica has excellent professional support....
bwcolor
Veteran
Maybe I'm off as you said. I was just going on comments made when they were introducing their medium format digital product.
Last edited:
leicashot
Well-known
Doesn't look like Leica are advertising the ability for Pros using M to receive support, only S users.
"Pro Repair Service
If you are a professional photographer and need your S-System product serviced then our Pro repair service is here to help. They will be able to service or repair your Leica S-System product to match your professional expectations."
and "If you are you a professional photographer and have any questions regarding our S-System products and services, then our Pro Service is here to help."
From here: http://en.leica-camera.com/contact/us/photography/index.html
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Paul Luscher
Well-known
"Leica build quality people rave about.."
Not nice, Sper, not nice. Hey, even Leica doesn't have a PERFECT record re camera failure rates--who does? Only know (so far, knock on wood) I haven't had any real problems with my digi-M. (Hope I didin't speak too soon...)
Not nice, Sper, not nice. Hey, even Leica doesn't have a PERFECT record re camera failure rates--who does? Only know (so far, knock on wood) I haven't had any real problems with my digi-M. (Hope I didin't speak too soon...)
L
lainer
Guest
They are computers after all. I have heard this before about the M9 sensors crapping out. I know many people who say the M8.2 was the best camera, that the M9 has too many quality control issues, even if it is full frame. Makes me mad as I just sold my M8.2 Ugh!
steelduck
Member
L
lainer
Guest
That's funny! LOL! But...what are the Leica M9 and D700 camera bodies sold? I'm sure there are more D700 bodies sold than M9s, as they are less expensive, and Nikon is used more widely than Leica. So, is this one for one comparison?
gliderbee
Well-known
I would like to see those stats compared with the number of sold cameras for both; that would make a meaningful statistic;
After all, taking this to the extreme:
if 13,201 Leica M9 were sold, of which 13,200 died,
versus 5,590,000 D700 were sold, of which 55900 died,
gives a different picture versus the bare figures of number of dead cameras.
(point is that the PROPORTION of sold cameras versus dead cameras is what counts, not naked figures about dead cameras).
Stefan.
L
lainer
Guest
If you go back to that same fight website and put in M8.2 VS M9, the M9 is trailing only a 100 units behind. Kind of scary. M8.2= 102,000 VS M9= 93800 M8= 110, 000. The Leica S2, which has only recently came out has 96, 600. Ouch!
L
lainer
Guest
OOps, I forgot to write dies in the fight part. So, here are the results again M8.2= 12,200, M8= 12500, M9=10,400!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
L
lainer
Guest
Well, there's hope then. HAhahaha! Not everyone knows of the Leica link.
cosmonaut
Well-known
i would be scared to get a high dollar camera. I have seen a few dead D3x's and 1d's too. At the prices you pay a killer warranty should be included.
eleskin
Well-known
More proof of the need for other Digital Rangefinders at cheaper prices
More proof of the need for other Digital Rangefinders at cheaper prices
Well I hate to say it but there is a flaw in the Digital M concept. If, as logic demands, these cameras are designed for a few years use, why overbuild them and charge such high prices? I would rather have a great sensor and a well built poly carbon body that can take M lenses for $2500 or so. After 3 years, ditch the outdated camera or computer since that is what they really are. I use Leica because of the lenses. The he'll with the camera body. I could not care less. I really hope we see more economical options in the future that are full frame and can take M mount glass. EVF, optical rangefinder (Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, etc,,,). Leica may even sell more lenses if there were cheaper cameras. Many people would have extra cash for great lenses instead of blowing money on finicky cameras that have a short life technologically.
More proof of the need for other Digital Rangefinders at cheaper prices
Well I hate to say it but there is a flaw in the Digital M concept. If, as logic demands, these cameras are designed for a few years use, why overbuild them and charge such high prices? I would rather have a great sensor and a well built poly carbon body that can take M lenses for $2500 or so. After 3 years, ditch the outdated camera or computer since that is what they really are. I use Leica because of the lenses. The he'll with the camera body. I could not care less. I really hope we see more economical options in the future that are full frame and can take M mount glass. EVF, optical rangefinder (Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, etc,,,). Leica may even sell more lenses if there were cheaper cameras. Many people would have extra cash for great lenses instead of blowing money on finicky cameras that have a short life technologically.
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
This is why gears and springs will beat circuits and solder nine time out of ten. My M2 works just fine, thank you. So do my M4 and Canon P. But I DO sympathise, and feel bad for the OP. 
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Hmm - most of not all DMRs that date back to 2004 still lead an active life and will set you back between 3000 and 4000 $ to buy - Digilux2 - still in active use by many photographers and of similar vintage - used prices at 50% of new. Not only those - RD1 with "antique" Nikon D70 electronics: still going strong. I am sure the same will happen with the M8 and M9 - extreme longvivety for digital cameras.