M9/MM/ME CCD sensor - the weakest link

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We've spent hard earned €£$ to purchase our M9/MM/ME 'premium product' cameras and are deserving of a reasonable return on our investments and some good old fashioned reliability. 'Return' and 'investment' are mentioned subjectively but for me mean reliability within a product's anticipated useable lifespan and reasonable market resale value. I'm quite prepared to pay for new shutters if necessary and other replacement parts worn through fair wear and tear. However, corrosion-prone sensors are another matter entirely; the whole digital rangefinder experience is spoilt knowing that I have otherwise superb products liable to be let down (and it's a big let down) by potentially unreliable sensors.

 

To quote the old adage, "A chain is only as good as its weakest link" - and even if Leica is prepared to replace defective sensors, unless the defect is permanently remedied, the annoying and frustrating potential for unreliability persists.

 

The general consensus on the forum is that Leica are to be praised for acknowledging the defect and for offering replacement sensors FOC. But that is the least that can be expected of any manufacturer. If a permanent solution was available and all existing cameras were recalled and upgraded then Leica could close the book on the problem significantly sooner.

 

I wish to say to Leica: "I (we) appreciate the temporary solution offer - but it's unlikely to inspire confidence in your products if the inherent potential defect is still there. Leica enthusiasts need the permanent solution hinted at asap - not a temporary patch likely to fail again - the same 'accident waiting to happen' - the same potential unreliability."

 

From what I've read the problem is solvable if a different cover glass plus necessary firmware become available. What I do not know is the lead time necessary and the extent of Leica's resources (both in-house and contracted) to bring the required permanent solution to fruition. We want a permanent solution but we also want to know just how long we have to wait for it - so that we can plan accordingly.

 

Unless permanently remedied, 'the weakest link' persists.

 

Best wishes

 

dunk

[tobey bilek]

Cleaned all the camera sensors yesterday, Nikons and M9. No evidence of corrosion so far. I feel blessed.

 

I would upgrade the M9P to 240 to forestal future issues, except the red line problem still persists.

 

Guess I`ll just ride it out to the end and call it a bitter lesson learned.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

Where did your red line problem persist? On one of he Nikons or the M9?

[NZDavid]

I am not surprised. Digital technology is still evolving. The emphasis has always been on features and performance rather than long-term reliability. This is true of all computer-based products. Leica has no choice but to outsource digital components and they will not be as reliable as other parts of the M-series cameras. However, at least it is still possible to replace sensors rather than having to replace the whole camera. Perhaps, in future models sensors will be more reliable.

[tobey bilek]

Where did your red line problem persist? On one of he Nikons or the M9?

 

Not on my M9, but there is one shat shows on my M8 at iso 2500.

 

I have a single red pixel at 400 on a D200. 6 or more other Nikons with no defects.

 

I can clone it out the M8 line with a PS action, one pixel wide marquee and a repair stroke down the line. Been practicing with red lines I made on purpose.

 

I consider it unacceptable to have to return a camera to have it mapped out. Do you realize they remove the sensor and associated boards? One person I know with an M8 had it come back with a M9 RF mask installed.

He finally figured out after almost a year of having heads chopped off, what the problem was. We should be able to send them a file, then they can determine the location and give use a firmware update.

 

I really do not like people working on my equipment or cars. I even do warrantee work rather that let the dealer have it.

 

So I am sticking with what I have for now, doing only non contact cleaning.

I also use an anti static Copperhill brush for what ever the rocket blower will not get. When I get time I will set up a small airbrush compressor ( with moisture trap) and use that with mild pressure through my airbrush. A sticky blob is going to be ordered soon. A lens pen might work for a single small defect. I will watch the humidity and store with moisture absorbing material.

 

The self cleaning mode on the Nikons seem to work well. Keep the lenses and rear caps clean.

[jaapv]

Afaik remapping is a software operation. The mask story is hilarious, but I don't think the rangefinder mask is in any way connected to the sensor Did they mix up rangefinder assemblies?

Edited December 15, 2014 by jaapv

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I remember having to change the sensor in my camera every 36 exposures.......

 

But seriously, its about time we all realised that digital equipment has a life expectancy which is lower than analogue used to have. True some items operate well beyond their design life (I have a digital clock radio which has been on operated for over two decades - the plastic casing has now yellowed with age - but it still works ok and I'm sure it wasn't designed to operate for this long), but there needs to be some realism and clarity from many manufacturers about design life and support intent.

 

On this note I have just started culling my hard drive collection. Most still work but are impractical for today's file sizes, and feature slow connectors (original usb or firewire - the weak link here). What to do with old technology?

[250swb]

- but it's unlikely to inspire confidence in your products if the inherent potential defect is still there.

 

It is as you say a potential problem. There could be many camera's that spend an entire lifetime without it appearing, there could be a few that need it rectifying twice. Asking for a permanent solution to a potential problem is personalising the potential problem without even having had the problem occur. Any business would think that is unreasonable.

 

All of society works on a cost (moral or fiscal) benefit analysis. There is an outside possibility you may get shot or stabbed in a robbery, so a permanent solution would be to put every other person in prison. That isn't going to happen, so there is jeopardy in every aspect of your life, and if you can deal with it day to day I can't really see why you can't deal with it when it comes down to a camera with a potential problem.

 

Steve

[keithlaban.co.uk]

I would imagine Leica would be aiming to find and offer a permanent fix to the problem as soon as possible. It's not in their interests to do otherwise.

[bocaburger]

I don't understand all the apologism for a problem Leica itself has already admitted is more than "potential" and have made a solid committed to solve.

[jaapv]

Indeed, and I am convinced that there are long talks between the technicians of the involved parties going on right now.

I anticipate long threads about the (imaginary?) differences in image quality of "old style" and "new style" sensors:D

[Prosophos]

Indeed, and I am convinced that there are long talks between the technicians of the involved parties going on right now.

I anticipate long threads about the (imaginary?) differences in image quality of "old style" and "new style" sensors:D

 

I imagine you are correct!

[Bill Livingston]

I anticipate long threads about the (imaginary?) differences in image quality of "old style" and "new style" sensors:D

 

Jeez... I hadn't thought of that!

 

Just when you thought this couldnt get any worse...

 

I'm SO glad I decided against the mint M9P I nearly bought a few weeks ago and that I settled on the 240 M-P...

 

The 240 M-P gives me everything I want... speed, flexibility, yes, the Live View/EVF which, for all its faults, allows use of a range on lenses that would otherwise either be impossible or require an additional finder... a much easier and faster rangefinder focus than I could ever manage on an M8 or an M9 and its just so beautiful and complete as a camera.

 

As far as results are concerned, I have seen so many variable results on CCD that members post as examples of a particular CCD 'look' they love that it's obvious to anyone less emotionally attached that pretty much all of these are as much a variable of lighting, exposure and post processing as the actual real life supposed advantages are. Im more than happy with the files from my M-P in DNG and even the camera produced jpgs are a step up.

 

That's before we go into the 'unfortunate' issues with the M8 when it first arrived and now the 'noise' surrounding the M9. In time all will settle down and we will all accept them as the brilliant cameras they are...

 

Despite their supposed faults, the M8 will produce excellent results as long as the user is aware how to get the best from it. Same with the M9 and its derivatives. Excellent cameras all. Yes, of course there are some idiosyncrasies in each which both the naysayers and the afficionadoes will either criticise at every opportunity or regale us all with them as 'character'.

 

None of it matters. Not really.

 

The Leica is no more prone to faults or idiosyncrasies than most other cameras... There is just a LOT more emotion involved.

 

And that's probably the point.

 

We use Leica for emotional reasons as much as technical strengths. Which means we will forgive their faults, just as we forgive the faults of our children or our partners... In fact, it's these very faults that endear them to us all the more. And ours to them...hopefully!

 

So yes, I'm more than happy with my current camera.

 

I prefer the look of the M9P, I think it's the most beautiful Leica since the black paint M4. I love the concept and the statement the MM makes to the world and I love the fact it's all a bit odd - that a simple tool engenders so much discussion and angst amongst it's users and those who look in...

 

All I would like now is a monochrom version of the 240 in a couple of years, not for any particular technical reason, but because of the focus it brings to your photography when out... It's a bit like having a single lens... It makes you think differently... It makes you focus on the image...

 

...and to find that the 240 and all its soon to be realised derivatives are as sound and as reliable in the medium to long term as they appear to be so far.

 

So, I would say enjoy the camera you have, life is too short to sweat the detail...

[wattsy]

The Leica is no more prone to faults or idiosyncrasies than most other cameras... There is just a LOT more emotion involved.

 

Not in my experience – the majority of recent cameras I have bought have required lengthy service in Germany.

 

I don't know about emotion but there is certainly a lot more money involved.

[Bill Livingston]

 

I actually meant in design. My poor use of English I'm afraid.

[dkCambridgeshire]

It is as you say a potential problem. There could be many camera's that spend an entire lifetime without it appearing, there could be a few that need it rectifying twice. Asking for a permanent solution to a potential problem is personalising the potential problem without even having had the problem occur. Any business would think that is unreasonable.

 

All of society works on a cost (moral or fiscal) benefit analysis. There is an outside possibility you may get shot or stabbed in a robbery, so a permanent solution would be to put every other person in prison. That isn't going to happen, so there is jeopardy in every aspect of your life, and if you can deal with it day to day I can't really see why you can't deal with it when it comes down to a camera with a potential problem.

 

Steve

 

 

 

dunk

[marcbo]

I'm sorry for my late posting but I don't use my M9 and M8 as often as I used to since I got the M(240). I use them as backup. My question is certainly answered somewhere and please be so kind to guide me to the answer.

 

I haven't noticed any corrosion on the M8 and M9. Will it still show up? Should I let the sensor be replaced now?

[dkCambridgeshire]

I'm sorry for my late posting but I don't use my M9 and M8 as often as I used to since I got the M(240). I use them as backup. My question is certainly answered somewhere and please be so kind to guide me to the answer.

 

I haven't noticed any corrosion on the M8 and M9. Will it still show up? Should I let the sensor be replaced now?

 

Leica is only offering to replace faulty sensors thus if your M9 sensor shows no signs of corrosion, Leica will not replace it - and the M8 sensor is not affected.

 

dunk

[tobey bilek]

Afaik remapping is a software operation. The mask story is hilarious, but I don't think the rangefinder mask is in any way connected to the sensor Did they mix up rangefinder assemblies?

 

If it is just a software remap, why would they take out the RF?

 

We have no idea of the source of the problem, but after much consternation and teeth gnashing and peoples heads being cut off, it was figured out. The problem did not exist before it was sent in and no complaint with the RF was given to repair.

 

It took three trips to repair and 6 to 8 months without the camera. All is well now except some damage to the cosmetics on a previously perfect camera. Two new lenses were sent in on the third trip for calibration. Both received slight damage.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M