bab
Newbie
sorry but I dont understand why Leica would ship a camera when knowing the leica m8 had not just a occasional blurp but deep inherent issues that amature or proffesionals would detect with in 100 frames.
The only thing i can figure is the engineers said we can not allow the camera into the hands of the consumer until we fix several issues and the marketing dept along with the board decided to release the camera and suffer the ridicule and loss of reputation.
Is this company playing the same game as most hi-tech manf these days ?
Barry
The only thing i can figure is the engineers said we can not allow the camera into the hands of the consumer until we fix several issues and the marketing dept along with the board decided to release the camera and suffer the ridicule and loss of reputation.
Is this company playing the same game as most hi-tech manf these days ?
Barry
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
because of all the whining of us consumers about a "real" digital leica?
Sparrow
Veteran
cash-flow in a small business can be very persuasive argument, it may not have been a choice
ywenz
Veteran
It's a partnership between Leica the company and their loyal followers.. The followers did the needful with their $5000 individual contributions to the cause. Now we expect Leica to act in a similarily greatful manner to the customers.. So far, they have not done so.
mpt600
Established
The M8's just been reviewed in Amateur Photographer here in UK; reviewer missed all the points raised here about the M8's glitches, which makes me wonder what sort of testing regime they have there.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
The sensor spill-over thing they probably did not know about. It may even have come from a last-minute change in a few wires in the camera. We are talking about fractions of nano-seconds in pulse rates there.bab said:
The IR thing in retrospect is probably quite logical as well.
1. They may not even have suspected it would be an issue. After all, Nikon, having the same thing on most of their models and only changing the IR filter on their later ones, never caught this flak, nor did their customers for the most part feel the need for filters. That Leica would be held to a far higher standard must have come as a -albeit unjustified- and unpleasant surprise.
2. Their partner in digital matters builds MF backs which behave exactly the same under IR. Those customers -studio-pro's- never even thought of complaining, they just screwed on the appropriate filter.
3.They must have thought that the totally accepted practice of firmware updates for WB problems and maybe even in part the magenta shift would be as acceptable to their customers as it has been in the past to customers of other high-end digital camera's. They were wrong.
4. They were reconciled to a round of Leica-bashing. It has happened at the introduction of every camera since the M5.
5.They had high customer-pressure to bring out this camera, especially considering the delay they had when they brought out the DMR, just to prevent this kind of thing happening. It must have cost them a fortune in prospective buyers that could (would?) not wait any longer and bought into the Canon 1D system instead.
Last edited:
Athena
Well-known
They may never have expected that this would become a big problem - and, really, has it?
Folks here are RF aficianados and zealous in their pursuit of perfection. But there is also the type of Leica owner out there who is more interested in wearing the camera as a piece of expensive jewelry.
Do you think the celebs and fashionistas toting the M8 as a deomonstration of their wealth and "coolness" are as upset as the folks here?
Folks here are RF aficianados and zealous in their pursuit of perfection. But there is also the type of Leica owner out there who is more interested in wearing the camera as a piece of expensive jewelry.
Do you think the celebs and fashionistas toting the M8 as a deomonstration of their wealth and "coolness" are as upset as the folks here?
J. Borger
Well-known
A Celeb or fashionista has better stuff to show off with than a stupid camera ...... it's just a machine to take pictures withAthena said:
Geeze .. people who are NOT passionate about photography do not even know what a Leica is .. or what an m7, m6 or the average Leica lens costs.
Most people can't tell the difference from a point & shoot .. that's one of the main reasons using it!
Last edited:
Sparrow
Veteran
J. Borger said:A Celeb or fashionista has better stuff to show off with than a stupid camera ...... it's just a machine to take pictures with
Geeze .. people who are NOT passionate about photography do not even know what a Leica is .. or what an m7, m6 or the average Leica lens costs.
Most people can't tell the difference from a point & shoot .. that's one of the main reasons using it!
Your missing the point, they are displaying them to their peers not the plebs in the same way all the status obsessed are compelled to do
venchka
Veteran
11-11-2006
11-11-2006
Nobody paid attention when I originally posted this. It still seems very plausible to me.
11-11-2006
venchka said:
Nobody paid attention when I originally posted this. It still seems very plausible to me.
ywenz
Veteran
Athena said:
If Leica is indeed giving in to the Celeb customers, then what a shame it is indeed.. The true spirit of Leica has been lost. However, it's hard for me to believe that a Leica has equal amount of superficial value as a piece of diamond.
Sparrow
Veteran
venchka said:
In most things cash is king, follow the money somebody once said, sales in November or bankrupted in January, tricky choice?
J. Borger
Well-known
Who cares ... what's the problem? People who think in these stereotypes about people showing off with products: wether Leica, Rolex, BMW or the latest Cellular phone should seriously consider psychotherapy .......... or learn to laugh about it!Sparrow said:
In the average ghetto people show off their latest Nikes .... well they can't impress me .. because i do not care about Nikes
But ....there are more people out there caring about Nikes than Leicas ...
Sparrow
Veteran
J. Borger said:Who cares ... what's the problem? People who think in these stereotypes about people showing off with products: wether Leica, Rolex, BMW or the latest Cellular phone should seriously consider psychotherapy .......... or learn to laugh about it!
In the average ghetto people show off their latest Nikes .... well they can't impress me .. because i do not care about Nikes
But ....there are more people out there caring about Nikes than Leicas ...
That’s true, you can only impress those who seek to impress others
Grober
Well-known
Ultimately? The irresistable pressure of the BOTTOM LINE.
Plus, they sure couldn't miss making a big splash at Photokina. (My dealer tells me he could have sold five times the number of M8s he sold in the first two weeks of November IF he had supply.)
These "realities" don't make me any less cheesed about it though. I'll have to be without the M8 for a minimum of three weeks when it eventually goes back to Solms for the necessary upgrade. Plus the necessary filters and now-mandatory 6-bit coding push my costs up for this new system.
-g
Plus, they sure couldn't miss making a big splash at Photokina. (My dealer tells me he could have sold five times the number of M8s he sold in the first two weeks of November IF he had supply.)
These "realities" don't make me any less cheesed about it though. I'll have to be without the M8 for a minimum of three weeks when it eventually goes back to Solms for the necessary upgrade. Plus the necessary filters and now-mandatory 6-bit coding push my costs up for this new system.
-g
georgl
Member
How many companies besides Leica give their customers free IR-filters?
How many companies don't even care about really big issues like insufficient build- and optical quality as long as their megapixel-race is making millions?
When you blame Leica you should also blame Nikon, Canon, Pentax... Banding, IR-sensitivity and many worse problems are all known there...
My M8 has a build-quality unlike any 35mm-class-camera, the optical and the overall image quality <800ASA is first-class, when the M8-IQ doesn't meet your expectations you need a MF-back.
It was the most expensive camera I've ever bought and when the banding is solved (December) it will completly meet my expectations - unlike other digital cameras I've considered in the past.
How many companies don't even care about really big issues like insufficient build- and optical quality as long as their megapixel-race is making millions?
When you blame Leica you should also blame Nikon, Canon, Pentax... Banding, IR-sensitivity and many worse problems are all known there...
My M8 has a build-quality unlike any 35mm-class-camera, the optical and the overall image quality <800ASA is first-class, when the M8-IQ doesn't meet your expectations you need a MF-back.
It was the most expensive camera I've ever bought and when the banding is solved (December) it will completly meet my expectations - unlike other digital cameras I've considered in the past.
V
varjag
Guest
Exactly. It's a shame Leica has to be first.georgl said:
ywenz
Veteran
georgl said:
No doubt, Leica is great at what it does good - that is building a solid camera body with great mechanical details. It doesn't do nearly as well in what it doesn't know about - producing robust digital imaging technologies. Competitors have insufficient build quality? Insufficient compared to what? How many film SLRs and DSLRs have you seen or heard failing due to the body simply breaking apart? How do you think your M8 will do in a rain or dust storm compared to a Canon 1D? Sure - Leica produces great lenses, but is a $3000 Leica lens 100 times as good as its Zeiss or CV cousins? Let's do less of the spin and more of the facts please.
Then again, this whole thread was started on Leica's responsibilities to its customers, I hate to bring out the Leica vs. "Others" argument again... ughh
Last edited:
willie_901
Veteran
The fact is none of us know why Leica shipped defective cameras. It could be due to financial pressure, it could be short-sighted greed (as in employees' bonuses depended on meeting a deadline), or it have been simple incompetence. Or, perhaps Leica simply made a very clever business decision.
Likewise, we do not know why Leica did not spin the M8's unusual IR sensitivity as an advantage. All Leica had to do was leak commnets about how the M8 sensor has resolution that almost violates the laws of physics because they use IR filters on the front of the lens, and not in front of the sensor. This propganda could have easily been parceled out bit by bit. The "reviewers" would have taken the bait hook, line and sinker. By the time the camera shipped, Leicaphiles would be bragging that they use IR filters (and that Leica IR filters are like no others).
What we do know is – Leica's initial M8 shipment has defective electronic components and defective firmware. This means either Leica did not carefully test the first run of production units, or they ignored these issues and hoped for the best. More troubling is the possibility that Leica could not afford to properly test the first batch of M8s.
None of the above matters at all. Here's why.
It seems some M8 owners could care less about these issues. Some are pleased that they can receive compensation (30% lens discount). Some spent hours of their time and their money to buy IR filters. Others wrote post-processing profiles just to obtain more pleasant color images. It seems to me the response of these M8 owners indicates Leica was very clever. Perhaps Leica gambled that the photographers who rushed to be first in line for delivery would also be generous, forgiving customers. If so, this was a good bet. After all, two IR filters at cost is well worth the cash flow (let's assume $3,800 gross per unit). Also, while a 30% lens discount is very nice gift for any M8 owners, these $600 - $2,600 lenses (after discount) will still bring cash flow into Leica's business. In fact, it is not silly to assume more new M lenses will be sold because of the offer. Less inventory is good business for Leica.
The behavior of the early M8 owners shows Leica had nothing to loose by shipping defective units. And, they barely received a "flesh wound" for mishandling the IR color distortion issue. Leica got the product out on time and the early adapters love them.
In the end, Leica wins. The early adapters believe they won. Leica knows that most of the RF enthusiasts who my be aliened or disgusted by the M8 introduction are not in their customer base now, and probably never will be Leica's M8 customers. The early adapters behavior proves Leica made the right business decision by either knowingly, or unknowingly, shipping a defective camera to the early adapters.
Likewise, we do not know why Leica did not spin the M8's unusual IR sensitivity as an advantage. All Leica had to do was leak commnets about how the M8 sensor has resolution that almost violates the laws of physics because they use IR filters on the front of the lens, and not in front of the sensor. This propganda could have easily been parceled out bit by bit. The "reviewers" would have taken the bait hook, line and sinker. By the time the camera shipped, Leicaphiles would be bragging that they use IR filters (and that Leica IR filters are like no others).
What we do know is – Leica's initial M8 shipment has defective electronic components and defective firmware. This means either Leica did not carefully test the first run of production units, or they ignored these issues and hoped for the best. More troubling is the possibility that Leica could not afford to properly test the first batch of M8s.
None of the above matters at all. Here's why.
It seems some M8 owners could care less about these issues. Some are pleased that they can receive compensation (30% lens discount). Some spent hours of their time and their money to buy IR filters. Others wrote post-processing profiles just to obtain more pleasant color images. It seems to me the response of these M8 owners indicates Leica was very clever. Perhaps Leica gambled that the photographers who rushed to be first in line for delivery would also be generous, forgiving customers. If so, this was a good bet. After all, two IR filters at cost is well worth the cash flow (let's assume $3,800 gross per unit). Also, while a 30% lens discount is very nice gift for any M8 owners, these $600 - $2,600 lenses (after discount) will still bring cash flow into Leica's business. In fact, it is not silly to assume more new M lenses will be sold because of the offer. Less inventory is good business for Leica.
The behavior of the early M8 owners shows Leica had nothing to loose by shipping defective units. And, they barely received a "flesh wound" for mishandling the IR color distortion issue. Leica got the product out on time and the early adapters love them.
In the end, Leica wins. The early adapters believe they won. Leica knows that most of the RF enthusiasts who my be aliened or disgusted by the M8 introduction are not in their customer base now, and probably never will be Leica's M8 customers. The early adapters behavior proves Leica made the right business decision by either knowingly, or unknowingly, shipping a defective camera to the early adapters.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
The true spirit of Leica? They have been presenting "special editions" to royalty and the likes for fifty years and more. I would say it is a part of Leica culture to beat the the Celeb marketing drum.Not that I like the practice or approve of it.ywenz said: