Jump to content

Ranma13

Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Member Title
    Neuer Benutzer
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Country
    USA
  1. To conclude this post, I finally received the SL back about 2 weeks ago, though not without incident. Total time it took for the repair was about 4 months. Here's a complete timeline: March 2: E-mailed Leica on February 29 to start a repair, received a UPS label on March 1. Sent in the camera the next day. March 14: Received no updates since I sent the camera in, so I e-mailed Leica USA. Received a reply stating that the camera was sent to Germany, and received a repair order number. April 19: E-mailed Leica asking for an update. Received a reply that they're checking the status of the repair, and will let me know once they have any info. Did not receive any follow-ups. May 2: E-mailed Leica asking for an update. Received an automated reply that they're currently upgrading their SAP system and that their responses will be delayed. Did not any follow-ups. June 28: E-mailed Leica asking for an update. Was told that the camera was sent out, but UPS returned it to sender because I no longer resided at the address. This is correct because our business have moved, but we asked the new tenants to hold onto any packages for us. E-mailed back with my home address instead, asking for a tracking number. July 1: Received tracking number. July 5: Camera delivered. The box indicated that the package was returned to sender on June 24. At no step along this way did I receive any communication from Leica that I didn't initiate myself. I didn't receive any repair status updates despite e-mailing them multiple times, and I wasn't even notified that the camera was getting shipped back to me. Had I not contacted them first, I also doubt that Leica would have reached out to me for my updated address. The repair bill also indicated that the camera was repaired, but listed no specifics. Given that the problem involved a stray hair trapped between the sensor and the IR filter, it would've been really good to know if they replaced the sensor or just mapped it out in firmware. This would be unfathomably bad customer service for any other company, but apparently par for the course for Leica (many stories out there about how you send in your camera, and several months later it just appears at your doorstep). It's left me seriously leaning towards dumping all my Leica gear because I cannot afford to sit around waiting for a months-long repair with no status updates, no estimates, and no notifications. The cameras are also so expensive that I cannot afford a backup body for the sole lens that I own. Leica really, really needs to step up their game in the customer service and repair department. This may have been tolerable with the film bodies and the digital M's, but if they're hoping to make an impact in the modern digital 35mm camera market, they need to have the support to match.
  2. I received the following reply from Bill Weier: and the following reply from Jim Nooney: I think I will wait until the end of the month before trying to contact them again. That way it'll be a nice even 3 months since I sent the camera in. I've heard about the long turnaround times and lack of visibility with Leica repairs, but it's hard to appreciate how frustrating it is until it happens to you personally.
  3. Thanks, I've tried that site already. My repair order number starts with a V, and the site says that it's an invalid repair number. When I try to enter the number without the V, I get "No repairorder available".
  4. For those that are interested in a more accurate translation that's not Google translated (I speak Chinese): "Why does the 2.0 firmware still do automatic noise reduction in DNG mode? It's a waste of battery life and time, and should be handled by Lightroom." To play Devil's advocate, he does have a point. The forced automatic noise reduction means that certain types of shooting either become very difficult or impossible to do, most notably fireworks (especially towards the end when they start shooting them in rapid succession) and time lapses (though it's debatable whether it's smart to wear out the shutter on a $7000+ camera). Having owned the M240, Q, and SL, I understand that this is just part of Leica's ideology, but it would still be nice to have the option. Sometimes I really don't want to or can't afford to take a 2-minute long exposure, then sit around for another 2 minutes while I wait for the camera to detect hot pixels.
  5. Hello all, I sent an SL to New Jersey to repair a mark on the sensor. I sent in the camera early March 2016, and they forwarded it to Germany for repair. I've since heard moot from Leica, and their reply to my most recent inquiry e-mail said that they were updating their SAP system, so there will be delay in their response. I'm getting kind of worried since there's no way to check the status and no estimation on when I can expect it back. I would hate for the camera to disappear into a black hole for 6 months or more. Given that the repair is on the sensor itself, it would likely be either a replacement unit or a major repair job, so I'd like some confirmation that it wasn't forgotten in some corner of Leica's repair facility. I was wondering, aside from e-mailing Leica New Jersey, is there another way I can check on the status of my camera repair? I did receive a repair number, but there doesn't seem to be any way I can use it.
  6. Hello, my Leica SL had a mark on the sensor, so I sent it to New Jersey for repair, who forwarded it to Germany. I have a repair order number, but it doesn't look like there's any way of tracking the repair status. Anybody know if there's any way I can contact Leica Wetzlar (I'm assuming it was sent there) to get a repair status update?
  7. As promised, here are the comparison images. In all shots, left is SL, right is M240. Both were shot on a tripod with the 50mm f/2 APO at f/2, ISO 100, and 1/4000 for the SL and 1/3000 for the M. https://imgur.com/a/wb6Oc (hosted on Imgur because this forum butchers the quality of attached images) The 1st image of the asphalt is a crop from the lower left corner. The M shows more micro-contrast, especially in the asphalt cracks. The 2nd image of the mud tracks is a crop from the upper left corner. The M is slightly sharper, particular around the edges of the fallen-down billboard. The 3rd image of the roof is a crop from the lower left corner, above the asphalt. The M clearly shows better details in the roof lines. The 4th image of the fire station sign is a crop from the lower center. You can see that the M is sharper around the words and the logo. Overall, the SL looks the same as the M in the center of the frame, and loses slight micro-contrast and sharpness as it gets to the edges. It's small enough of a difference though that, unless the images are of the same shot, viewed 1:1 side-by-side, I doubt anyone would notice the difference.
  8. I have both a M240 and SL. Based on the comparison images I've shot, I've noticed that the SL has slightly less micro-contrast in the corners as the M, and the SL exposes about half a stop to a stop lower than the M240 when both are using center-weighted metering. Unless you're A-B'ing them though, I doubt you'd see the difference. I will post 1:1 crops once I get home from work.
  9. There's a small difference. The M262's shutter sound is slightly shorter than the M240, but sounds sharper. Volume-wise, I wouldn't say it's quieter. Around the same volume, just a different sound. Also, you can feel the M262's shutter 'kick' the camera in your hands. This is something I don't feel with the M240.
  10. Aha, that seems to have been it. I read the patch notes and support for the M262 was added in 6.4, and I was on 6.3. I updated to 6.4 and the hot pixel and banding issue have gone away. Thanks!
  11. The term used was "technically different" or "technologically different", which can mean anything from a firmware tweak to a completely different sensor. It's possible that the rental unit had problems, but the issue I had was hot pixels, which I doubt would be specific to only the rental camera considering that it's controlled by the firmware. I just did a default import for LR, no custom profile. It could be that Lightroom is not processing the hot pixel mapping from the RAW file, but there's no way to tell if it is or not. I can post some photos tonight highlighting the issue.
  12. I just sent a M262 rental back and will not be replacing my M240. From what I saw, there are quite a few hot pixels that show up in the shadows when you push the exposures more than +1.5 to +2 in Lightroom. I saw this behavior in multiple shots around ISO 400-800. There's also significant banding as well, almost like they took the algorithm from the Leica Q and Leica SL and applied it to the M262. On top of that, reds seem to be over-saturated. To my eyes, it seems that the M262 is not just a M240 with an aluminum top plate and live view removed, but rather a modified sensor processing algorithm.
  13. Hello all, I recently sent in my M9 for a rangefinder calibration and I just received a repair estimate from them. The status is marked as 'Approved' and the cost is '.00'. However, it doesn't explicitly state that I don't have to do anything in order for them to start on the repair. My question is, am I good to go now, or do I have to actually approve the free repair before they start on it?
  14. So it looks like in the best case, it will be less than a week, but in the worst case, it might take up to 8 weeks. I'll wait for a response from Leica, but I have a feeling I'll be keeping the camera with me until the holiday season is over.
  15. Thanks gib. I've sent them an e-mail, but they're off for the Thanksgiving holiday and won't be back in the office until Monday. The reason why I asked here is because I find that estimates by the company are usually inaccurate. I wanted to get a feel for what people actually experienced vs. what the company told them.
×
×
  • Create New...