Two Dead M9s

[Adman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is a rather scary thread.

 

Unfortunately, I must add to it.

 

My M9 had paint missing from where you insert the battery (on the metal frame) and it had roughly 150 shutter actuations already registered.

 

To add insult to injury, the accompanying 35 f2 had a large spec of dust (or a scratch) on the inside.

 

Unlucky? Maybe. But it doesn't speak highly of their QC. Both the dealer and Leica have acknowledged that it's not right and will be replacing both items. This has come at a significant financial cost to myself - having to return everything and naturally, no camera or lens. Funny thing is I moved to Leica thinking I was getting away from these exact sort of dramas. Nikon were a nightmare.

 

For all the arguments that the M9T is somehow responsible; I don't think it's relevant whether it is [involved] or it isn't. The fact is, the QC is awful and Leica need to acknowledge and address it pretty soon.

 

I hope my 2nd set is up to par - if I decide to repurchase. At the moment I've been completely refunded and am considering my options.

[Advertisement]

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

[digitalfx]

This is a rather scary thread.

 

Unfortunately, I must add to it.

 

My M9 had paint missing from where you insert the battery (on the metal frame) and it had roughly 150 shutter actuations already registered.

 

 

The bottom plate comes from Leica with a plastic protective cover over it. If you are referring to the actual area where the battery is inserted, this is plastic. In either case I find it highly unlikely that it came from Leica like this. Sounds like you may have bought a display model.

[Adman]

The bottom plate comes from Leica with a plastic protective cover over it. If you are referring to the actual area where the battery is inserted, this is plastic. In either case I find it highly unlikely that it came from Leica like this. Sounds like you may have bought a display model.

 

Where you attach the bottom plate to the camera itself, there is a metal frame that wraps around the camera (making up the body). This "frame" - right on the edge, on the outside of the battery slot, is where the paint was missing [bottom edge]. It is not plastic.

 

But yes, it is disconcerting that it had this issue.

[ho_co]

Ad--shutter actuations are normal. I don't know how many.

 

The paint will wear (if I understand you correctly) from the attachment and removal of the bottom plate.

 

You may indeed have purchased a demonstrator. I'm glad Leica is standing behind it for you.

[ho_co]

... But Sony and others have sure shown that creative minds can come up with unique solutions.

As I said, there are many ways if you start from scratch. And what you get won't be an M body.

[giordano]

A fixed semi-silvered mirror would be the solution as in the case of the Sony A55 if there is enough room.

 

If you think a moment it's obvious that there isn't enough room. A fixed "semi-silvered" mirror would have to cover the entire frame and would therefore be the same size as the one in the A55 - which is actually bigger than a conventional SLR mirror. (It can be bigger, because it doesn't have to swing up while there's a lens mounted. See Sony SLT-A55 Review: 4. Body & Design: Digital Photography Review near the bottom of the page.)

 

The reason it has to be big is that if the "semi-silvered" mirror only covers part of the frame, some of the rays reaching the main sensor from the lens would pass through the mirror and be refracted at the two surfaces of the mirror (and therefore displaced laterally by a fraction of a millimetre) while the rest would pass directly to the sensor. Even if it were possible to avoid this by creating a zero-thickness mirror or using glass with the same refractive index as air (both impossible, btw) the parts of the image formed mostly by light that had passed through the mirror would receive less exposure than parts formed mostly by light that had not passed through the mirror.

[glenerrolrd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Roger, can you please explain what the sensor line problem is?

 

And yes, I fully agree, that it seems a new out of the box m9 does need calibration and a full day of good testing.

I do not agree that it should be this way. But it is.

It almost turned me off Leica.

I know of people that were turned off Leica because of it.

 

I am not the best source for the root cause of the sensor line problem ..but it occurs with some cameras and is visible at higher ISOs (like 1250) ..its a thin white or light vertical line. I don t believe they have to replace the sensor but only Leica can repair this.

 

To be fair on calibration ..the issue is mating two mechanical devises (lens and body) each with tolerances and the potential to wear overtime. A good solid thump can knock a rangefinder out of alignment. So its possible for a camera body to "meets specifications" and not focus with your lenses. When the M8 was introduced it was possible for both the body and the lens to "meet specifications" and not focus accurately enough for digital captures. I have not seen this problem with the M8.2 or the M9 but some fine tuning my nevertheless be required if you have many lenses .

 

This is not a problem for many M users because the might be using 28,35,50 lenses at normal working apertures ..but if you try a Noctilux or a 135APO you many need a fine tuning.

 

So I accept that calibration is inherent in a CRF system (was hard to accept after a lifetime of using film M s where it rarely showed up. ) and that legacy lenses especially summiluxes/noctiluxes frequently need calibration.

 

IMHO its still the very best system (cost aside ) for street and travel and situations where a discrete size is important.

[phancj]

If you register as a Leica professional photographer, Leica will expedite all repairs and send you loaner equipment if you need it. None of my repairs have taken over a week with overnight shipping both ways. Leica was sending me a loaner M8 when I had my shutter replaced (my fault) but I got my camera back before I received the loaner. I have no complaints with Leica professional service.

 

Tina

 

Is that option to register as a leica pro photographer open for newbies like me?

[AlanG]

As I said, there are many ways if you start from scratch. And what you get won't be an M body.

 

It will be whatever they call it. They can make no changes, a few modifications or even totally revamp the entire system at some point. Since Leica is busy selling existing designs, I doubt if they have an incentive to make the investment to change much even if the end result would be significantly "better."

 

I bet that they are working on an M10 that will have all new electronics even if the mechanical parts change little. But once you start changing the rangefinder to add electronic frame lines, why not also get rid of the mechanical rangefinder system for an electro-mechanical device that would be more accurate and could be programmed for each lens?

 

And consider the how small the Sony Nex is. If similar technology were used in an M this would leave a lot of room inside the body or could allow for a smaller overall size.

[AlanG]

If you think a moment it's obvious that there isn't enough room.

 

I figured there wouldn't be enough room, but that doesn't mean that Leica should not look for creative solutions. I am using Sony as an example of a company that is solving some problems with unique ideas, not saying that Leica should simply copy what they do. As camera resolution has increased and people look at their images at 100% on huge monitors, all focusing and viewing methods are under pressure to improve.

[ho_co]

Alan, I think you're missing the point that John and I are making: The M system is a dead end. There's not much further you can take it and leave it looking and feeling like an M.

 

And I agree with Roger that for most users, the system is not troublesome as it stands. Digital has meant that tolerances had to be tightened, and Leica has done this properly.

 

Again, see Erwin Puts' article of 7.III.2010 on the topic.

[AlanG]

Alan, I think you're missing the point that John and I are making: The M system is a dead end.

 

It could well be if it isn't changed substantially as you can only make and keep tolerances so tight without two way feedback that keeps tuning it.

 

I guess this is all in one's perspective of what you want an M to look and feel like. Gradual or major changes are possible and probably inevitable. Does a Nikon D3 look or feel much like a Nikon F? Yet it is still compatible with the old lenses. If people want a modern M and an old fashioned one at the same time, they will be getting compromises.

 

I don't care how tight they try to make the tolerances, there is not going to be any way to reliably focus a 50 .95 lens tight on someone's face without some kind of good electronic focus confirmation or magnified live view.

[giordano]

I don't care how tight they try to make the tolerances, there is not going to be any way to reliably focus a 50 .95 lens tight on someone's face without some kind of good electronic focus confirmation or magnified live view.

 

Magnified live view won't cut it: no ordinary person could stand sufficiently still while switching from the magnified "focusing" view to a full-frame view and reframing the picture.

[sidmuer]

It seems as though, there are multiple poor experiences from each of us.

And that's what is a little upsetting.

I had this issue with my first m9 body.

The sensor line I had could faintly be seen at ISO 640. Above that, it was more profound.

I had it to the slight right of the center traveling from the bottom, 3/4 of the way up. It was a light redish color for me. Appeared especially on skin tones.

Anything below 640, and it was non-existent. I was quite upset.

I went to see another m9 body to purchase, and it had severe back-focus issue. The person selling it said he sent it into Leica, and they shipped it back claiming there was no issue. There was no mistaking this, however. There was an issue.

The lenses I tested it with, I had previously taken it to a local shop that had an m9 body demo. ( was not for sale )

I tested my lenses, and they were all spot on focus.

I found another m9 that I ordered.

When it arrived, it has a SLIGHT back-focus. Not severe, but a good 15mm off from the tests I put it through.

That is THREE Leica's. 2 with similar issues at different levels.

There is definitely something afoot here.

 

I have noticed that the Leica roller located at the center top lens mount just inside the camera is on a swing arm of a sorts. If it was to push out just a millimeter more, it should line up focus with my lenses more accurately. Now, I don't want to spend the shipping cost, nor time with Leica. Can I loosen the screw this arm connects to and adjust the rollers position to my liking focus wise?

Or is it for something else?

 

I am not the best source for the root cause of the sensor line problem ..but it occurs with some cameras and is visible at higher ISOs (like 1250) ..its a thin white or light vertical line. I don t believe they have to replace the sensor but only Leica can repair this.

 

To be fair on calibration ..the issue is mating two mechanical devises (lens and body) each with tolerances and the potential to wear overtime. A good solid thump can knock a rangefinder out of alignment. So its possible for a camera body to "meets specifications" and not focus with your lenses. When the M8 was introduced it was possible for both the body and the lens to "meet specifications" and not focus accurately enough for digital captures. I have not seen this problem with the M8.2 or the M9 but some fine tuning my nevertheless be required if you have many lenses .

 

This is not a problem for many M users because the might be using 28,35,50 lenses at normal working apertures ..but if you try a Noctilux or a 135APO you many need a fine tuning.

 

So I accept that calibration is inherent in a CRF system (was hard to accept after a lifetime of using film M s where it rarely showed up. ) and that legacy lenses especially summiluxes/noctiluxes frequently need calibration.

 

IMHO its still the very best system (cost aside ) for street and travel and situations where a discrete size is important.

[AlanG]

Magnified live view won't cut it: no ordinary person could stand sufficiently still while switching from the magnified "focusing" view to a full-frame view and reframing the picture.

 

Who says you have to switch? A portion could be magnified. Plus even with most implementations today, the switching is pretty fast when you touch the shutter release. And the magnified portion can be positioned anywhere in the frame to eliminate the need to recompose. People shoot this way all the time.

 

In the distant past, and with some lenses today, Leica users have to move their eye between the rangefinder and viewfinder.

 

With magnified manual focus - turn lens, image magnifies, focus, touch shutter button and shoot. (Maybe you'll need to re-frame and maybe not if you've already positioned your focus point.) For many uses, this is probably faster, more accurate and more repeatable than using a rangefinder on the eyes and recomposing. But it is a new and different way of working.

 

The hybrid viewfinder of the Fuji X100 is another example of creative thinking. All I'm getting at is that the goal is to have great tools to make photos. If Leica wishes to limit the M system to one specific concept that is their choice. But it is clear that other companies are exploring new ideas.

 

As for Leica's QC regarding rangefinder/lens consistency... If they currently feel they are doing the best they can do and still make a good profit, and things are leaving the factory either within tolerances or just later drifting on their own, then maybe they'll have to consider a more reliable design or one that can be user adjusted more easily.

[gjames9142]

I bought an M9 in April. On day two, the SD card reader went down. I was given a loaner, thanks to a good dealer in Toronto. When the camera came back, the brightline finder lever fell off without my even noticing. Odd, because I had never even used the lever. A spare part was sent, and my dealer took it to the local Leica guy to have it put in -- a matter of hours. In general, it is a great camera, with wonderful lenses --if you can find them. I happen to prefer late pre-asph versions, but if you want to get something a little sexier, consider this. B&H has 32 Leica lenses listed. Only 8 are currently available, of which 6 are Summarits. This frankly seems a ridiculous situation and leaves me with the feeling that Leica is out of its depth in the planning department.

[phancj]

I bought an M9 in April. On day two, the SD card reader went down. I was given a loaner, thanks to a good dealer in Toronto. When the camera came back, the brightline finder lever fell off without my even noticing. Odd, because I had never even used the lever. A spare part was sent, and my dealer took it to the local Leica guy to have it put in -- a matter of hours. In general, it is a great camera, with wonderful lenses --if you can find them. I happen to prefer late pre-asph versions, but if you want to get something a little sexier, consider this. B&H has 32 Leica lenses listed. Only 8 are currently available, of which 6 are Summarits. This frankly seems a ridiculous situation and leaves me with the feeling that Leica is out of its depth in the planning department.

 

I am still on the fence for the M9, but trying to buy camera/lens combo is a joke.

 

First, the M9 was out of stock EVERYWHERE until about 2 months ago, with plenty of lenses, lux, cron you name it.

 

Now the M9s are abundant everywhere, and all the lux and crons are gone.

 

I was advised by the leica boutique to buy the camera first and await the lenses. No thanks. With what I am hearing on this thread and others, I would not want to watch my warranty slip by without even lenses to try if my camera is okay. I am new to leica and have zero M lenses. Used lenses are not cheap also, and also few lux and cron around either.

 

Meanwhile, Nikon is launching new lenses all f1.4s and spectacular. I bought (85mm) and am still buying the next one (35mm) out next month, all these happening while waiting for the lux and cron. They also just launched a 200mm f/2 too. And available too. Sounds like good business sense to launch something people can actually buy?

 

I also have my X1 which I like.

 

C'mon leica, put some muscle behind producing the lenses at a faster pace to meet demand, and hopefully M9s with newer serial numbers have less problems with more issues identified and resolved. A $8,000 (in my case here, thats the retail price) dud is not funny.

[Guest Holy Moly]

Leica doesn't trust the long lasting demand for M lenses. They try to establish a second lineup of S-lenses and on top a third lineup for C-lenses.....that's all......

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ho_co]

Guys, come on! Quit complaining about the lens you want not being readily available.

 

That has been the case since Leica started making interchangeable lenses, and isn't going to change so long as they deliver the product they do.

 

Leica underestimated M9 sales. The extra sales meant extra demand for lenses.

 

Leica is a small company and produces lenses in batches. They can't have 14 lines running, producing 14 types at the same time. They produce one type, then change the plant over and produce another type.

 

Leica's designs are among the most sophisticated on the market, and make heavy use of various special glass sorts.

 

For some glass types, Leica is the only purchaser. So the manufacturer makes a batch of that glass when Leica orders.

 

It can take a month to manufacture some glass types because they require slow cooling to avoid striations.

 

For these and other reasons, it can take six months from date of order for Leica to receive some glasses.

 

 

Quit complaining. If you find the lens you want, buy it, because someone else will if you don't.

 

Just settle in for the long haul. That's the business Leica is in.

[phancj]

Guys, come on! Quit complaining about the lens you want not being readily available.

 

That has been the case since Leica started making interchangeable lenses, and isn't going to change so long as they deliver the product they do.

 

Leica underestimated M9 sales. The extra sales meant extra demand for lenses.

 

Leica is a small company and produces lenses in batches. They can't have 14 lines running, producing 14 types at the same time. They produce one type, then change the plant over and produce another type.

 

Leica's designs are among the most sophisticated on the market, and make heavy use of various special glass sorts.

 

For some glass types, Leica is the only purchaser. So the manufacturer makes a batch of that glass when Leica orders.

 

It can take a month to manufacture some glass types because they require slow cooling to avoid striations.

 

For these and other reasons, it can take six months from date of order for Leica to receive some glasses.

 

 

Quit complaining. If you find the lens you want, buy it, because someone else will if you don't.

 

Just settle in for the long haul. That's the business Leica is in.

 

The problem IS finding the lens you want, isnt it?

 

CJ