open message to Mr. K at CV about sloppy assembly

[literiter]

Some time ago I purchased a used Bessa L. It worked fine for a few months then the take up clutch began to slip too much.
It cost me so little it seemed worthwhile to attempt a repair on my own. All I found when I took it apart was cheap plastic and tin.
Utter junk. I threw it out!

(If someone would like me to post a link to it's disassembly with pictures (on APUG) I'll do it. )

I bought a 15mm Voigtlander Super Wide Heliar (f4.5 LTM) about the same time. It was to be virtually married to the Bessa L.

I really like the lens, for the most part, but the mount is certainly questionable. I want to have the ability to mount the lens on the Barnack or my M2 with the Voigtlander LTM to M adaptor.

The lens will not mount on the Barnack and properly align horizontally without removing the mount from the lens and realigning it with the base. Once it is aligned with the Barnack it will not properly align with the M2 and the adapter.

Very sloppy.

I think the CV line of cameras and lenses should be looked at more closely.

 

[CameraQuest]

Stephen: all were bought used here on RFF, except for the ZI body which was bought from KEH.

I would have used my local repair guy, even if under warranty, as he is quite close and usually stops what he is working on and repairs my equipment while I wait. Usually no charge or minimal cost.

So you buy used Voigtlander and Zeiss to save $, which is fine,
and then complain loudly about poor assembly and build quality
when you really don't know how those pieces of equipment were treated before you bought them - or if those products were improperly serviced before you bought them by techs who did not know what they were doing? :bang:

I have bought a lot of used cars, and all of them certainly needed repairs at one point or another. But it absolutely never occurred to me to complain about poor used car build quality to that car's manufacturer, expecting or hoping that the CEO or staff would respond to my about one of their used products needing repair. never.

That said, could Cosina made Voigtlander or Zeiss products be improved - both in design and durability? Of course. But don't forget that statement is also true of Nikon, Canon, and Leica. Leica's occasional QC problems are legend due the very high premium they charge for their new product. The first QC big problems I recall after the Leitz family sold Leica were plastic M6 frame counters that broke and M6 film plates that scatched the film.

I probably see more Cosina made products in a day than most RFF members see in a year. And I warranty those items for the first year. So I am also fairly sure I know a lot more about Cosina made quality than someone who only buys used Cosina products.

I feel great about helping photographers get into rangefinder photography who can't afford to buy at Leica prices. I am proud that Cosina made Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses can give Leica's much more expensive lenses a run for their money. I have toured Cosina's factories. Cosina workers are proud of their work too, and how their products fit into the rangefinder marketplace. For roughly 30 years, from Canon discontinuining their rangefinders in 1968 until 1998 when the first Cosina made Voigtlanders were introduced, Leica had NO rangefinder competition. Now that Leica is competing against Voigtlander and Zeiss, the rangefinder scene is alive again. That new aliveness in rangefinders is due to Mr. Kobayashi and Cosina more than any other factor - even if a lot of the dedicated Leica lovers won't admit it.

Its not easy starting from scratch and building an entirely new camera and lens lineup. Cosina's staff has constantly aimed at improving their products. Voigtlander's designs and products have made huge gains since their initial introduction to the marketplace in 1998. All the Leica experts laughed at Voigtlander's 15mm lens - until they shot with it. Voigtlander bodies and lenses have been much improved over the years because the Cosina staff is dedicated to making the best product they can for the price. But that does not mean Voigtlander and Zeiss products are as well made as the much more expensive Leica products, any more than Chevy or Ford or Fiats are as well made as Mercedes.

Bob, you can be sure that Cosina staff is working hard to improve all of their Voigtlander and Zeiss products. Not because of this thread, but simply that is their job. Mr. Kobayashi and the rest of the Cosina staff really is dedicated to making the best products possible within a given product's parameters.

Properly taken care of and properly serviced, current in production Cosina's Voigtlander and Zeiss products are reliable and durable - and better than earlier designs of the same product. I am sure of that, even if you are not. Even so with each new design Mr. Kobayashi and his staff strive to improve what has gone before - like the new Voigtlander 35/1.2 V2 that is just now shipping from the factory.

Bob, I am sorry to read about your problems with used Voigtlander and used Zeiss equipment. While most any product could be better, I think your comments on used Voigtlander and Zeiss equipment very inaccurately portray what the great majority of new Voigtlander and Zeiss buyers experience. Yes, of course some customers will have problems, but those problems will be fixed under warranty.

I think in the future you will be a lot happier with new Voigtlander and Zeiss products. Even so, I will pass on your comments about your used equipment experience to the factory. Customer feedback helps produce better future products. 🙂

Thanks,
Stephen

 

[Bob Michaels]

Stephen: I appreciate your response. Thanks.

We do agree overall that the Cosina assembled products, both Cosina Voightlander and Zeiss Ikon are good values overall. You make reference to my equipment being used, I can only state.

* I do doubt very seriously that the ZI 50mm Planar and the CV 40mm that I bought used but LN, both developing binds in the focus, were disassembled, and the factory lubrication removed and inadequately replaced.

* I also doubt that my primary ZI body, bought LN, was disassembled by the previous owner and reassembled but without the screws being tight so that the rewind crank and shutter speed/iso dial fell off.

* Similarly, I doubt that the CV 75mm f2.5 lens, bought used but LN, that began to come apart was disassembled and reassembled before it became mine.

If you read the posts in this thread and conclude there is no public perception of Cosina assembly problems, that is your decision. It is your call how much a robust market for used equipment supports new sales. You are in the business of selling CV products. I am not.

We just see the same data and reach different conclusions.

I do thank you for your response.

 

[thegman]

My experience with Cosina built gear is Nokton 35, Color Skopar 35, 21mm and 15mm Heliar, 1.1 Nokton, R4A, Zeiss Ikon, and the build has been good on all. In fact my Summicron DR wobbles more!

That said, bad ones will always slip through QA, it's a fact of life. Also, these products are a *lot* cheaper than Leica, so we cannot expect similar build, although in my experience it is fairly similar in many regards.

 

[dct]

I own only an older LTM Color Skopar 28/3.5 from Cosina (bought used) and it still has an amazing mechanical feeling: The stops clicking correct and the focus turning smoothly. Statistically my one good lens has no weight. That's why I reply better to another aspect of this thread, cannibalizing it a bit.

...Reading this thread and elsewhere, it does seem to be a widespread problem. Actually, not much camera gear seems built to last these days, probably because of short product lifetimes and outsourcing; the average digicam is probably designed for 1-2 years maxmum*. Prime lenses should be an exception though, because some people will want to keep them for life.

*our first Fujifilm digicam spontaneously cracked across the body after 18 months; the replacement Canon Powershot developed a loose and erratic lens door after about six months. The Ricoh Caplio after that keeps turning itself off and the current Lumix, while reliable, has the slowest and most unreliable AF I have ever seen. Digicams are junk.

I made different experiences. Or maybe my family had good luck with digital cams, because
- my father uses very hard a Ricoh Caplio R8 (2nd hand), working already many years flawless
- my son uses since 4 years a Fujifilm FinePix S6500fd, without problems
- my wife uses still her old Canon PowerShot IXUS60 (since 2006)
- I had never problem with my reliable Minolta RD-3000 system for macro and other home work (2nd hand since 2004)
- I use for everyday snapshots the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX30. Still running perfect after 4 years of rough use.

At least the number of good working older digital gear is more representative than my only CV lens...

 

[ImpMan71]

I have a 21mm, 35mm & 50mm - never had any problems.
I have a Bessa R & R2. The R is well documented for having the rangefinder go out of alignment & has also been slated for having a plastic back & other things beside.
I have never had a problem with it - a great little camera!
My R2 which is meant to be greatly improved has gone out of alignment twice.
As with everything it seems to be the luck of the draw.

 

[Eric T]

I have purchased six CV lenses. Of those six, three have functioned well for a few years, all screw mount lenses (15mm f/4.5, 28mm f/1.9, and 35mm f/1.7). Two others just fell apart (25mm f/4.0 M-mount and 50 mm f/1.5 LTM). Granted these mishaps occurred well beyond the warranty period. I recently bought a sixth CV lens, a 25mm f/4.0 that I bought to replace the older one.
My take on this is that I have to accept a lower build quality because of the low cost of CV lenses. I am very pleased with these lenses optically. I may have to replace one once in a while but that is still VASTLY cheaper than either used or new Leica glass.

 

[Livesteamer]

I would remind folks that if you produce a million identical widgets a year, you can get the process so it is almost perfect. When you produce just a few hundred a year, while producing many other products at the same time, it becomes much more challenging. Yes, there are faults but we owe Mr. K a big Thanks for making the effort to fill a small niche in the market and provide us with some wonderful products. Thanks Mr. K and Crew. Joe

 

[raid]

Improved quality control adds lots to the cost of products.
You get what you pay for.

 

[RFluhver]

Firstly, I'm a fan of CV lenses myself. I have a few of them. In terms of price😛erformance ratio, I reckon CVs are unmatched.

But I also reckon that these CV apologists are off their rockers if they think that there is no QC problem. There's just far too many reported problems in numerous websites over the years for this to be just mere perception. And, as it happens, I've experienced the problem! One of my two 35/2.5s also have the dreaded loose front issue.

I'm sending it off today to Cosina today for a fix. Their repair centre is in Nakano, and I'm in Tokyo, so hopefully I'll get it back quick.

 

[ferider]

Improved quality control adds lots to the cost of products.
You get what you pay for.

No you don't. Just because CV lenses are cheaper than Leica lenses, doesn't mean they are "cheap". Compared to modern lenses for digital cameras, they are in the same ball-park as the best lenses out there.

Note that I like my CV lenses. Some of them bought new, some used. But there is an issue. For example, I once bought a mini-finder with the frame-lines reversed (parallax correction at the bottom). Or I had to adjust a 28mm metal finder since the framelines were twisted. A new 35/1.7 Ultron not focusing properly. Etc. Luckily all this can be adjusted DIY.

Roland.

 

[daveywaugh]

I'm another CV fan and appreciate a lower cost alternative. That said, I had an R3A go back for repair in warranty three times, and a 40mm twice. The R3A was a joke frankly - in the end the dealer replaced it completely and was very apologetic. Yeah it's cheaper than a Leica but at the time I was thinking "my FM2s never needed any TLC for 20 years".

I think all this discussion is healthy and hopefully helps Cosina produce better products. Everyone here is right IMO - CV products are GREAT value, but there is also a very obvious ongoing QC problem.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Firstly, I'm a fan of CV lenses myself. I have a few of them. In terms of price😛erformance ratio, I reckon CVs are unmatched.

But I also reckon that these CV apologists are off their rockers if they think that there is no QC problem. There's just far too many reported problems in numerous websites over the years for this to be just mere perception. And, as it happens, I've experienced the problem! One of my two 35/2.5s also have the dreaded loose front issue.

I'm sending it off today to Cosina today for a fix. Their repair centre is in Nakano, and I'm in Tokyo, so hopefully I'll get it back quick.

Wouldn't it be nice if Cosina was to say that if any of their products started to fall apart, they would tighten the screws and assemblies at no cost regardless of age and regardless if you were the original purchaser or not. Just return it to the factory or the designated service center for your country. This is a quick fix for a knowledgeable camera repair tech but a PITA to the owner.

If this truly is a rare occurrence as represented, the cost to Cosina should be minimal.

In the US, we call that "putting your money where your mouth is".

 

[daveywaugh]

Compared to modern lenses for digital cameras, they are in the same ball-park as the best lenses out there.

I wanted to say that too - totally agree. We can't just compare CV with Leica.

 

[Tom A]

I have been following this thread for a while. I have virtually a complete set of CV lenses and Bessa cameras. None are shelf queens and all are quite heavily used.
In 11 years I have had three problems, the aperture ring on a 35f2.5 II snapped a screw, my 35f1.7 developed a slight "wobble" - but I could fix that myself and a R2M had a wonky contact in the meter and would occasionally only flash the + sign. Most of the time it works fine though.
As a comparison: My Leica MP sucked in dust through the seal at the ocular - Leica gave me some new seals and I could replace it and "sucked" out most of the dust (still some - but not enough to worry about). Film pressure plate fell out on another MP - kind of surprising when you open the back-door and it bounces out. Got it back in and so far so good.
Severe battery drain in several M6TTL's - batteries gone in 2-3 hours!
Multiple aperture rings cracked or broken in Summicron 35f2 v IV and later 50f2 Summicron's.
My Zeiss snapped the film-rewind lever - though I was partly to blame for that.
The Leica/Zeiss/Bessa's are mechanical contraptions and can have problems - Of course, we dont want them to break down - but it will and can happen.
The funny thing is that it does not seem to have anything to do with the price either - MP's are considerably more expensive than Zeiss and Bessa's and they have their share of problems too.
Problem is that if you buy it "out of warranty" or "used" - just as with a used car. the reason for the lower price is the chance that if something breaks - you have to bear the cost of the repair - and as with a used car - you have to wonder why is the person selling it and this goes for cameras and lenses too.
Loc Tite or Thread Loc compounds are fine - as long as you are aware that IF the lens/camera ever would need a service - it could cause severe problems and make the lens/camera unrepairable or add substantially to the repair costs.
It could be worse - Leica R4's from the first series have 228 hard soldered points on the "chip" - to repair one - you have to desolder them all (which is why early R4's have a very low value).
I think everything can be improved - be it cars/cameras or lenses - but there is a price point to consider. VC lenses has allowed many of us access to optics that we could only dream of 10 years ago, Zeiss ZM series lenses are among the best you can find - and still have money left over. Buying a Leica lens is major cash sacrifice (I seem to do it every 4-6 years these days and then only after careful consideration - 2011 is the year of the Super Elmar 21f3.4 - hopefully nest week).

 

[raid]

No you don't. Just because CV lenses are cheaper than Leica lenses, doesn't mean they are "cheap". Compared to modern lenses for digital cameras, they are in the same ball-park as the best lenses out there.

Note that I like my CV lenses. Some of them bought new, some used. But there is an issue. For example, I once bought a mini-finder with the frame-lines reversed (parallax correction at the bottom). Or I had to adjust a 28mm metal finder since the framelines were twisted. A new 35/1.7 Ultron not focusing properly. Etc. Luckily all this can be adjusted DIY.

Roland.

Hi Roland,
As a quality control expert, I was saying what I said from that point of view. High quality means low variability, and this can translate into extra cost.

 

[Krosya]

So you buy used Voigtlander and Zeiss to save $, which is fine,
and then complain loudly about poor assembly and build quality
when you really don't know how those pieces of equipment were treated before you bought them - or if those products were improperly serviced before you bought them by techs who did not know what they were doing? :bang:


Stephen

Well, maybe Bob bought his lenses used, but there many here stated that they got thiers new and had problems. So, clearly there is a problem with QC or something.

That being said - here is my experience with CV/ZM products:

I have and had many different lenses and cameras in CV/ZM line. I have never had any Serious issues with any of them. My problem was - paint flaking off and uneven focus on CV 40/1.4 . Another problem , which is a bigger issue - SAMPLE VARIATION. Took me a few lenses in some cases to find a good/sharp sample. Sometimes I fixed this myself. Having said this - I'm fully aware of the issue that many report. Being an amature fixer-uper, I try to prevent most of the known issues by opening lenses myself and making sure all screws are tight and secure them so they dont get lose. Not on all lenses, but on some. Haing worked on several CV lenses, I can tell you that IMO mechanical design/materials used are NOT the best compared to Hexanons I have. In some cases they use plastic parts where I think metal should be better. Compared to some vintage lenses I worked on, like Nikkors LTM - most CVs are not as good.
So, I still think that CV lenses are great and are great value. They should be checked for problems and minor things should be done in some cases - like re-lube or secure screws, but its a small price to pay for the glass you get. Yet I still think that if you like the images quality of Hexanons - they are the best value for the RF camera - great glass and superb built, too bad they are scarce and dont have as wide of a selection as CV does.

 

[sanmich]

- SAMPLE VARIATION.

Precisely!
and if one doesn't have the means to buy and sell several samples before setting up his mind, he should limit himself to a few of the VC lenses that appear more "stable", or with less sample variation of the optical quality.

 

[anthony_semone]

Stephen,

Why do you limit your warranty to only one year? Do you offer a paid-for extension?

 

[sazerac]

I have a 35/1.2 v1 that has developed a "rattle". Best I can tell it didn't affect image quality but I want to get it repaired before I sell it. Are there certain repair shops that are recommended for CV lenses? Does anyone know of a good repair shops in DFW?