Jump to content

M8 caveats


simonpg

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While looking for a mint M8 (the additional features of the M8.2 are of little benefit to me), how can a buyer have confidence that the sensor has none of the issues that originally arose (beyond the purple blacks / IR filter issue) among some of the early production units.

 

Here I'm referring to the appearance of green banding and some vertical light streaks in low light situations.

 

I understand that Leica recalled cameras and refitted sensors; angry customers sent their cameras for a sensor refit etc..

 

If this applied to early production units, is there a serial number point at which a buyer is safer?

 

But, while I'm looking at a mint M8 with every item originally shipped with it and its possible production date was about 6 months after the first shipments went out; AND a genuine seller has never seen a problem in his pictures, how can I be sure there are not sensor issues hiding and just waiting to be discovered?

 

Maybe this question is impossible to answer. BUT, many of you have had your M8 cameras for some time now and know other M8 owners.

 

Were the sensor issues that required a sensor refit (rather than the firmware updates) were they blindingly obvious to any owner?

 

Did Leica identify batches and do a re-call?

 

Or, if the sensor had the issues that required a refit, they were just obvious from day one and any owner would run screaming back to his (or her) dealer?

 

While the camera I am considering sounds, distance prevents me form taking it for a test shoot. The seller is a dealer and is offering a warranty, but all the same I don't want the risk of an unhappy purchase.

 

Or, is it just better to avoid the M8 and hunt for an 8.2 or an M8 with evidence that it has had a sensor replacement - i.e. get one that had the problem identified and fixed by Leica knowing any sensor issue has been resolved.

 

Thanks for sharing your experiences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was just one recall, series 3100000 to 3101500 to add a mass connection to prevent high ISO banding and some rare defects. No angry customers sending them in, not for a sensor refit either.Leica will still do that in a one week turnaround, should you manage to find a camera that needs it (extremely unlikely). Other than that just individual things like on any brand camera. There was never a sensor refit program. All M8 and M8.2 cameras are identical in that respect. The only thing you may fiind is a green band in some, rather exceptional lighting situations ( blown highlight exactly on the frame edge), but all M8 and M8.2 cameras do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Leica Maker Note of the exif there is an indication of the installed version of the main electronic components (CCD sensor, CCD board, controllerr board and MC16 micro controller).

The original CCD board was replaced with a new version at the very beginning because of the banding issue and a second time in the summer of 2008 due to a change in the supply. It should be then identified with ID n°1 or ID n°2 in the exif in order to be sure that it is not one of the unmodified defective units (ID n°0).

This for instance is a cut and paste from the ExifTool reading of one of my M8 file:

 

Lens Type : Elmarit-M 24mm f/2.8 ASPH.; 24/35mm frame lines engaged

External Sensor Brightness Value: 6.33

Measured LV : 8.12

Approximate F Number : 3.0

Camera Temperature : 17

Color Temperature : 0

UV/IR Filter Correction : Active

CCD Version : 0

CCD Board Version : 1

Controller Board Version : 0

M16C Version : 0

 

Cheers,

Ario

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is incorrect. The original version 1 motherboard was replaced by a sucessor mid-2007 iirc the date, due to a change by the parts supplier. The sensor remained the same and there was no performance or reliability difference between the motherboards. It was extensively discussed here in this forum, with one member threatening to sue Leica because he was not informed of the "upgrade" (!). Needless to say that the hoohah died down when it turned out it made not one whit of difference.

The original recall action entailed a soldered connection being installed.It may well be Leica identifies that in EXIF to keep track, that I don't dispute. Later, in May 2007 we had the T2 upgrade, where Leica replaced a suspect transistor for every camera coming in from one small series. It had caused sudden death in a small number of cameras because a batch was out of spec..

Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that the original CCD board version, n°0, was replaced with version n°1 immediately after the launch of M8 in December 2006.

Cameras produced after the second change of the CCD board, for reasons due to the supply, have the version n°2 installed.

I may have confused the date for this second change (2008 instead of 2007).

Cheers,

Ario

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not alone, even at the time Mark Norton was unsure what happened with the recall:

 

This was the board that was supposedly replaced by the hardware recall and we understood at the time that the sensor was not being replaced. However, the sensor is soldered to this board, you can see the rows of soldered connections (4 * 15 pins), so it’s not clear exactly what was done.

 

I recall seeing an image of the soldered mass connection somewhere, but I cannot find it that easily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My CCD Circuit Board ID is Rev.3

 

(This is a replacement camera)

 

BTW, PhotoME is a powerful freeware to read EXIF data, including Manufacturer Notes.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is only due the the software used to read the exif.

I've seen the same happening with my own camera exif data: the ID N°0 in ExifTool is red as ID n°1 by an other exif reader I was using in Windows, N°1 is red as M°2 and so on.

Cheers,

Ario

 

Ario,

 

My other M8 is Rev. 2 (produced in Feb. 2008) and the very first camera was Rev. 0 and become Rev. 1 after T2 upgrade... Always using the same software... IMHO there're Rev. 0, Rev. 1, Rev. 2 and Rev. 3

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ario,

 

My other M8 is Rev. 2 (produced in Feb. 2008) and the very first camera was Rev. 0 and become Rev. 1 after T2 upgrade... Always using the same software... IMHO there're Rev. 0, Rev. 1, Rev. 2 and Rev. 3

Can you try to read the exif from the same camera you have shown above with ExifTool or with CornerFix, just to cross check.

Cheers,

Ario

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you try to read the exif from the same camera you have shown above with ExifTool or with CornerFix, just to cross check.

Cheers,

Ario

 

Ario,

 

I suppose you're right ;)

 

Cornerfix 1.3.0.3 says:

 

Leica MakerNotes

Selected user profile: 4

Camera Serial Number: 3196098

White Balance Preset: Auto or manual

Lens Id: Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm f/4 ASPH.

Frame Selector Position: 24/35mm frame lines engaged

Blue Dot Brightness: 9.191406

TTL Brightness: 10.078125

Leica Estimated Aperture: f/4.0

CornerFix Calculated Aperture: f/4.0

System temperature: 16 C

Color temperature: Not Recorded

UVIR Correction: Not Active

CCD Sensor Id(?): 0

CCD Board Id(?): 2

Controller Board Id(?): 0

M16C micro-controller Id(?): 0

Unique Image Id: 895

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks gentlemen.

 

So, in summary: essentially the M8 sensor itself was fine (except any failures unique to specific cameras) in general. The non-firmware and non-IR cut filter related image issues were caused by the mass / circuit board the CCD was attached to. Therefore even today any affected camera can have that replaced still.

 

While EXIF data indicates if that board was upgraded. serial numbers above 3101500 are likely safe from that problem.

 

I suppose that sums it up - OK?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon, after your research and thread replies, you should rest assured that a mint M8 is unlikely to prove faulty. The vendor's guarantee should also give you peace of mind. Failing that, this forum is rich with members' knowledge and experience and advice. Leica has a reputation for looking after its customers; witness the Digilux 2 sensor saga! Few makers offer that level of service long after warranties have expired.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon, after your research and thread replies, you should rest assured that a mint M8 is unlikely to prove faulty. The vendor's guarantee should also give you peace of mind. Failing that, this forum is rich with members' knowledge and experience and advice. Leica has a reputation for looking after its customers; witness the Digilux 2 sensor saga! Few makers offer that level of service long after warranties have expired.

 

+1:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again my thanks gentlemen for your great help.

 

Your sentiments about Leica's attitude are very valid.

 

Recently I noticed my 50mm 'cron-M now 6 years old under-focused at infinity (true very distant infinity) by about 1mm turn of the barrel.

 

When I emailed Leica in Germany - they said "we have your records here so have no fear we will correct it under warranty". They copied in our local importer who equally responded wel.

 

Nut while this is great to see in today's world of poor customer relations, when we buy premium goods, we rightly expect premium performance and service.

 

On a lighter note - poor Leica - they must have the fussiest customers on earth!! :) :) :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...