Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
...and kind of sick of digital as a result.
So, I just found ANOTHER hot pixel in my M9.
The first one I found was in the M8 a few months after I got it. I
dealt with it as long as possible but I had to have a digital
camera.
When I got the M9, I found the hot pixel 3 days after taking possession
of it. I then sent the M8 out for repair and almost 3 months later, it
came back in better condition. Right after that, I sent the M9 out for
repair and it took just over 2 months to repair.
Here I am right now with the M8 out for a rangefinder adjustment (among
a few other dubious sounding procedures like "pixel alignment.") It's out of warranty and is going to cost me the same amount as a user M2.
Now my M9 is going in ASAP, while it's under warranty but I'm seriously
considering selling both of them due to this lack of reliability.
I've babied both of these bodies and they have been in the shop a very
significant amount of time that I've owned them. The M9 has been out of
my hands about 1/3 of the time I owned it and the M8 has been out about
1/4 of the time. That's ridiculous. I took both my M4 and old M2 (since
sold) to hell on earth and beat the crap out of them like I wasn't
going to live past the click of the shutter. Both of the film cameras perform amazingly well to this day.
I may be beating a dead horse but I "invested" in these bodies to use
for a career but I've always known that the M4 would be my reliable
backup. I can't afford to have this gear out for expensive repairs this
often. It doesn't make financial sense and regardless how much I like
the M9, I didn't want to own an Alfa-Romeo, Jaguar or a Triumph.
I'm not set up yet to sell stock to pay for the camera. I got the older
one through saving up and tightening my belt. The M9 I got through the
Student Purchase Program and had help paying for it (GI Bill.) If I
sell them, I'll never be able to own another M9 at any price over
$2000. The big question is, can I afford to NOT sell them?
So far, the cameras are glorious disappointments in reliability. They
are fantastic implementations of some kind of ideal but when the rubber
meets the road they don't work reliably. Leica has dropped the ball and
while I love them and their products, they may have lost me for future
new purchases due to their equipment failures.
I'm just sick of this and needed to rant.
Thanks all,
Phil Forrest
So, I just found ANOTHER hot pixel in my M9.
The first one I found was in the M8 a few months after I got it. I
dealt with it as long as possible but I had to have a digital
camera.
When I got the M9, I found the hot pixel 3 days after taking possession
of it. I then sent the M8 out for repair and almost 3 months later, it
came back in better condition. Right after that, I sent the M9 out for
repair and it took just over 2 months to repair.
Here I am right now with the M8 out for a rangefinder adjustment (among
a few other dubious sounding procedures like "pixel alignment.") It's out of warranty and is going to cost me the same amount as a user M2.
Now my M9 is going in ASAP, while it's under warranty but I'm seriously
considering selling both of them due to this lack of reliability.
I've babied both of these bodies and they have been in the shop a very
significant amount of time that I've owned them. The M9 has been out of
my hands about 1/3 of the time I owned it and the M8 has been out about
1/4 of the time. That's ridiculous. I took both my M4 and old M2 (since
sold) to hell on earth and beat the crap out of them like I wasn't
going to live past the click of the shutter. Both of the film cameras perform amazingly well to this day.
I may be beating a dead horse but I "invested" in these bodies to use
for a career but I've always known that the M4 would be my reliable
backup. I can't afford to have this gear out for expensive repairs this
often. It doesn't make financial sense and regardless how much I like
the M9, I didn't want to own an Alfa-Romeo, Jaguar or a Triumph.
I'm not set up yet to sell stock to pay for the camera. I got the older
one through saving up and tightening my belt. The M9 I got through the
Student Purchase Program and had help paying for it (GI Bill.) If I
sell them, I'll never be able to own another M9 at any price over
$2000. The big question is, can I afford to NOT sell them?
So far, the cameras are glorious disappointments in reliability. They
are fantastic implementations of some kind of ideal but when the rubber
meets the road they don't work reliably. Leica has dropped the ball and
while I love them and their products, they may have lost me for future
new purchases due to their equipment failures.
I'm just sick of this and needed to rant.
Thanks all,
Phil Forrest
-doomed-
film is exciting
Bummer man. I think that I'd be disgusted as well, I went the SLR route for paid work these days. With that said, I miss the form factor of any of my M's.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Yeah, that prospect is really sad but if I had to have this newest issue fixed out of warranty, I could buy an X100 or used Canon 5D + a lens for the same amount of money. I don't know why Leica can't fix this issue that everyone else has. I mean, in a premium cost, supposedly premium quality piece of gear.
I'm thinking a D2X might be the ticket for digital and another M body would have me set for film. Or I could just use all film. Heck, I'm not employed as a journalist right now anyway.
Phil Forrest
I'm thinking a D2X might be the ticket for digital and another M body would have me set for film. Or I could just use all film. Heck, I'm not employed as a journalist right now anyway.
Phil Forrest
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
Phil, you deserve better than that. I think Leica, NJ or Solms, needs to see this in a letter so they can make the situation right.
The thought of an expensive repair bill after the camera is out of warranty is daunting. Has anyone had good experience with a 3rd party extended warranty?
The thought of an expensive repair bill after the camera is out of warranty is daunting. Has anyone had good experience with a 3rd party extended warranty?
ChrisN
Striving
Sorry - confused here: does one hot pixel (in the M9) equate to a reliability issue?
(I'm suffering withdrawal at the moment as my M4 is away for repairs and service. Bloody Leica's.
)
(I'm suffering withdrawal at the moment as my M4 is away for repairs and service. Bloody Leica's.
)
Bobbo
Well-known
Hey, Phil. Sorry about your luck. On the plus side, you have an F3 I know personally works very well, hehe .
If you go to eBay, prices there seem obscene these days. You might end up very, very lucky. If it was my bread and butter, I'd seriously consider ditching the cameras if they don't make the rent.
M8's are selling for $2.2k to $3.5k right now. M9's are $5.5k to $7k, most being around $6,000. Hell, I could almost live off that without work for a year and still pick up a D300s to shoot to build up some stock. (I'm frugal, but a part-time job at the Y check-in counter would cement it)
On the D300s note, I'd ignore the D2X and go for a D300s (KEH has Nikon-refurbished and warranted D300s' for $1,200). The output is far better than the D2x (especially at high ISOs), plus they're far lighter and take much cheaper batteries that last a good long while. AF is about in the same league. Of course, if you get top dollar for the Leicas, a D700 or D3 might not be entirely out of the picture.
Hope that was even slightly helpful to the guy who got me into Leicas in the first place.
--Bob
.If you go to eBay, prices there seem obscene these days. You might end up very, very lucky. If it was my bread and butter, I'd seriously consider ditching the cameras if they don't make the rent.
M8's are selling for $2.2k to $3.5k right now. M9's are $5.5k to $7k, most being around $6,000. Hell, I could almost live off that without work for a year and still pick up a D300s to shoot to build up some stock. (I'm frugal, but a part-time job at the Y check-in counter would cement it)
On the D300s note, I'd ignore the D2X and go for a D300s (KEH has Nikon-refurbished and warranted D300s' for $1,200). The output is far better than the D2x (especially at high ISOs), plus they're far lighter and take much cheaper batteries that last a good long while. AF is about in the same league. Of course, if you get top dollar for the Leicas, a D700 or D3 might not be entirely out of the picture.
Hope that was even slightly helpful to the guy who got me into Leicas in the first place.
--Bob
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
ItsReallyDarren: The M9 is still in warranty. If I had to do this out of warranty I'd be selling an expensive usable paperweight.
ChrisN: I have a bright red pixel in the lower left third of every photo at every ISO, so it's a reliability issue in my book. That, and I've had it fixed on this same camera once before. And once before on the M8.
Yes, it's ONE pixel out of over 18 million of them but it's a very prevalent channel, peaked at about 100% red. I don't want to correct them in post, I want the problem taken care of at the factory. For me and all the digital Leica owners out there.
How the hell can they be making money hand over fist when those of us who actually look at photos to possibly print keep seeing these issues? I have a friend who went through 2 M8 bodies with shutter issues then 2 M9 bodies, one with a sensor fault the other with a shutter issue. He sold them and bought an M6.
Every person I know who has owned an M8 and or an M9 has had an issue with it. They have all gone back to the factory. I think that's close to 100 camera bodies that have gone back for some severe issue. This is not the "beta" M8 we're talking about either, it's the "flagship" of Leica and what is inflating prices on all things Leica compatible rangefinder these days. It's BS is what it is.
Phil
ChrisN: I have a bright red pixel in the lower left third of every photo at every ISO, so it's a reliability issue in my book. That, and I've had it fixed on this same camera once before. And once before on the M8.
Yes, it's ONE pixel out of over 18 million of them but it's a very prevalent channel, peaked at about 100% red. I don't want to correct them in post, I want the problem taken care of at the factory. For me and all the digital Leica owners out there.
How the hell can they be making money hand over fist when those of us who actually look at photos to possibly print keep seeing these issues? I have a friend who went through 2 M8 bodies with shutter issues then 2 M9 bodies, one with a sensor fault the other with a shutter issue. He sold them and bought an M6.
Every person I know who has owned an M8 and or an M9 has had an issue with it. They have all gone back to the factory. I think that's close to 100 camera bodies that have gone back for some severe issue. This is not the "beta" M8 we're talking about either, it's the "flagship" of Leica and what is inflating prices on all things Leica compatible rangefinder these days. It's BS is what it is.
Phil
benmacphoto
Well-known
Sorry to read this Phil.
After going through my M8 issue, my own fault, I'm very happy with my M6 and Nikon scanner.
I've got no complaints going all film with my M's, they've never let me down.
And you know, now you can use that new Rolleiflex more.
After going through my M8 issue, my own fault, I'm very happy with my M6 and Nikon scanner.
I've got no complaints going all film with my M's, they've never let me down.
And you know, now you can use that new Rolleiflex more.
filmfan
Well-known
Get an SLR (Canon 5D) for digital and a Leica M for film use... this sounds easy to me
K14
Well-known
Sorry to hear that Phil.
I deal with hot pixels in my astro photography chips but I take a dark subtracts and remove them. Works for outer space but not here on earth.
Sounds like a Leica quality control issue. I don't know what brand chips they are using but I haven't heard any issues like this from the Epson users or for that matter the micro 4/3 users.
I hope Leica gets on board quickly and solves this issue.
Gary
I deal with hot pixels in my astro photography chips but I take a dark subtracts and remove them. Works for outer space but not here on earth.
Sounds like a Leica quality control issue. I don't know what brand chips they are using but I haven't heard any issues like this from the Epson users or for that matter the micro 4/3 users.
I hope Leica gets on board quickly and solves this issue.
Gary
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Bob:
Thanks for the encouragement and perspective of the options. I was thinking D2x because I can use ancient Nikon glass which I love.
By the way, I still have a "homemade" ~35mm finder for you and somewhere here is a standard cable release adapter. I'll stick them in the mail when I find that cable release adapter.
Ben:
Yeah, you and Sam have both shown me that film is still good. And I have that awesome scanner and the awesome computer that I just upgraded with 3TB of RAID5 storage. I can scan TIFFs for quite a while with that amount of room.
My M4, another film M body, a few bricks of Plus-X and Tri-X, plus a road trip are probably a good cure for what ails me.
K14: They've been dealing with it since the debut of the M8 a few years ago. I think they will just keep cranking out cameras and letting people think their $7000 photo experience is flawless. Don't pixel peep though!
Phil Forrest
Thanks for the encouragement and perspective of the options. I was thinking D2x because I can use ancient Nikon glass which I love.
By the way, I still have a "homemade" ~35mm finder for you and somewhere here is a standard cable release adapter. I'll stick them in the mail when I find that cable release adapter.
Ben:
Yeah, you and Sam have both shown me that film is still good. And I have that awesome scanner and the awesome computer that I just upgraded with 3TB of RAID5 storage. I can scan TIFFs for quite a while with that amount of room.
My M4, another film M body, a few bricks of Plus-X and Tri-X, plus a road trip are probably a good cure for what ails me.
K14: They've been dealing with it since the debut of the M8 a few years ago. I think they will just keep cranking out cameras and letting people think their $7000 photo experience is flawless. Don't pixel peep though!
Phil Forrest
Last edited:
rdeleskie
Well-known
If it makes you feel any better, my digital Nikons and M4/3 cameras all have hot pixels, so I don't think it's strictly a Leica reliability issue. I've chosen to ignore them: they're a quick fix in Aperture when need be. That said, I might feel differently if I'd paid Leica prices for those bodies, and so I sympathize with your frustration.
Ranchu
Veteran
Just logically, it doesn't make any sense to use equipment professionally (or otherwise...) that you can't afford to repair. I feel for you, it's hard to face disappointment in gear you thought would work for you, I've been there a lot. That said, I had two D200's with decent amounts of hot pixels. I have to admit I didn't mind them at all, rather charming. Film has dust, digital has hot pixels. That's just me, I certainly understand someone being upset about it. People are different. My only digital these days is a Canon A560 though, nice unit. Best luck to you!
Last edited:
fotomeow
name under my name
Phil, I think you are right on. You dont buy a Mercedes or a BMW to have it keep disappointing you.
I had a nice specimen M8.Ux3 that was great to use, but due to all the problems that other users IDed,
I decided that I would buy an extra warranty (Mack) to hedge my bets.
I sold the camera with the warranty still on it, so the new user could send it in when they received it if they wanted.
The new user received it and then reported bad vertical line streaking, so he sent it in to Leica.
I was just fantasizing about that Black Dot M9 in the Classifieds right now, that all the posters are frothing over. THen I saw this post, and thank you for reminding me about Leica. I'm not writing them off completely, since I may have to get another film M to replace the one that I sold so I could buy the M8.U! (and future digital).
I had a nice specimen M8.Ux3 that was great to use, but due to all the problems that other users IDed,
I decided that I would buy an extra warranty (Mack) to hedge my bets.
I sold the camera with the warranty still on it, so the new user could send it in when they received it if they wanted.
The new user received it and then reported bad vertical line streaking, so he sent it in to Leica.
I was just fantasizing about that Black Dot M9 in the Classifieds right now, that all the posters are frothing over. THen I saw this post, and thank you for reminding me about Leica. I'm not writing them off completely, since I may have to get another film M to replace the one that I sold so I could buy the M8.U! (and future digital).
Last edited:
fotomeow
name under my name
Ranchu: "Film has dust, digital has hot pixels. " Well said, and point taken. THere is no
perfect medium.
perfect medium.
ChrisN
Striving
Honest question here: is digital technology yet at the point where it is possible to guarantee zero hot pixels on a sensor? I know my Pentax has a "Pixel Mapping" option in the menus, which "corrects defective pixels" (presumably by turning off that pixel). Isn't this common on high-end cameras?
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
The problem with Leica's hot pixels is that they come with vertical lines and while a hot pixel can be corrected for, a vertical line through a scene with varying gradations in contrast can't. I haven't seen the line yet, but it will be there soon enough. Actually, I won't know, the camera isn't having one more frame shot as I'm sending it in to Leica ASAP before the warranty runs out. Hopefully this shortage of Leica bodies and lenses is still around when the M9 comes back from NJ.
For now, I'm shooting with a Rolleiflex!
(life could be worse)
ChrisN: pixel mapping IS common. The RD1 had it in 2004 even. But no Leica digital has it. That fact is so ridiculous that it's funny.
Phil Forrest
For now, I'm shooting with a Rolleiflex!
(life could be worse)
ChrisN: pixel mapping IS common. The RD1 had it in 2004 even. But no Leica digital has it. That fact is so ridiculous that it's funny.
Phil Forrest
Ranchu
Veteran
As I understand it, sensors can always have hot pixels, they're too expensive to throw out the units that have them, and I guess they can appear over time, so they map them out in camera firmware. Seems to me mine may have got more numerous on the camera I owned from new, not much though. Nikon's raw software had a setting that got rid of them but the file wasn't as pixel sharp. That was the reason I was using the D200 with the CCD, so I didn't use it, it was different than whatever the factory did. You could send them to Nikon and have them map them out though. edit: didn't know about the lines, and no mapping with the Leicas. Gee.
Last edited:
ChrisN
Striving
Sorry if I sound unsympathetic Phil. I'd like to consider an M9 one day, and it's disappointing to hear of these problems still, and frustrating to lose the camera for months for a fix.
Just googled and have learned the difference between dead pixels, stuck pixels and hot pixels. Give me dust any day!
Also found an interesting post on the Adobe Lightroom forums that suggests that Adobe Camera RAW is pretty good at spotting and removing hot pixels in RAW files while it processes them. Good news for RAW shooters using ACR (if it works!).
Just googled and have learned the difference between dead pixels, stuck pixels and hot pixels. Give me dust any day!
Also found an interesting post on the Adobe Lightroom forums that suggests that Adobe Camera RAW is pretty good at spotting and removing hot pixels in RAW files while it processes them. Good news for RAW shooters using ACR (if it works!).
Ranchu
Veteran
Thinking about that, it may be wrong. I think the jpegs didn't have the hot pixels, but the raws did, but you could send it in to map it out on the raws. Sorry, it was a while ago.