Two Dead M9s

[Guest trond]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear Alan,

 

I can confirm that!

 

I own both lenses, and especially the TSE 17mm is a remarkable lens in terms of IQ and versatility.

 

However, then there is the question of size, and size does matter with lenses!

 

TSE 17mm is monstrously huge compared to the 18mm SE or the Leica WATE.

 

If I set the WATE at 17mm and the TSE 17mm in the senter position, the IQ goes in the favaour of the WATE.

 

Then again, the WATE is almost twice the price of the TSE 17mm.

 

As for size and weight, the WATE is 1/3 the weight and 1/10 the volume of the TSE 17mm!

 

I also own the Canon 35mm f 1.4L, after comparing the IQ with the Leica Summilux 35mm ASPH, I got so depressed on behalf of Canon, and never used the 35mm f1.4L again.

 

As for price, the SX 35 is almost three X the Canon 35mm f1.4L.

 

And again, the weight is 1/4, and the size is 1/10 in favor of the Leica.

 

You get what you pay for, I just wish that Leica, out of the box would give us the quality and performance that the product is designed to give!

 

Best regards

 

Trond

 

PS: It is not completely fair to compare the TSE 17mm to the WATE as the TSE design is very demanding, especially at 17mm and full format. On center the performance of the TSE is first rate, so is also the WATE.

[Advertisement]

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

[AlanG]

 

PS: It is not completely fair to compare the TSE 17mm to the WATE as the TSE design is very demanding, especially at 17mm and full format. On center the performance of the TSE is first rate, so is also the WATE.

 

I know what you are getting at regarding size and weight, but it seems that making the lenses smaller also is a limitation causing a trade-off. (Pink corners, vignetting - do they distort?) The 17 and 24 TSEs have virtually no distortion and no c/a and vignetting isn't bad. Being a tilt/shift design is another reason for the large size. But my point is that Canon and Nikon are capable of making extremely good w/a lenses and seems to be moving in that direction now that customers want it and seem willing to pay the price. (Size, weight and $$s)

 

In any case I'm not disputing that people really like the Leica lenses, just that others have gotten along without Leicas. So one isn't really forced to put up with Leica if one is unhappy for whatever reason. Anyway, I suspect that many M users also have a DSLR system, so they don't have to depend on the Leica for all their photography needs. Thus they can put up with waiting for a lens or service.

[jplomley]

You get what you pay for, I just wish that Leica, out of the box would give us the quality and performance that the product is designed to give!

 

Precisely. My own experiences aside, a colleague I shoot with has had to have his lenses sent in for adjustment which included the 35 Cron, 50 Lux Asph, and 75 AA. Straight out of the box, they all had focus issues. WTF kind of QC is that. Over 10K in glass, and not one lens focussed correctly. Simply inexcusable.

[russell]

I paid good money and waited 6 weeks earlier this year for Leica to do an overhaul on a 50mm Summilux. It was waay off focus when it came back. A week later it had to be sent back to Solms where it sat again for 5-6 weeks. I have it back now.

Seems to be in focus but when focusing sometime it catches a bit. It's not entirely smooth.

 

So under warranty it will get sent back for a third time

[jplomley]

So under warranty it will get sent back for a third time

 

Russell, I share your pain. Took two tries to get my 75 Cron Asph properly adjusted.

[vanhulsenbeek]

Russell, I share your pain. Took two tries to get my 75 Cron Asph properly adjusted.

 

That is painful! My sympathies! I had my 75 Cron adjusted too, and just trusted what I got back. It now seems OK

 

It seems we are at the cutting edge between mechanical and digital. Mastering that and also coping with increasing customer demand must create major headaches at Solms. They have my sympathy as well!

[Guest trond]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Precisely. My own experiences aside, a colleague I shoot with has had to have his lenses sent in for adjustment which included the 35 Cron, 50 Lux Asph, and 75 AA. Straight out of the box, they all had focus issues. WTF kind of QC is that. Over 10K in glass, and not one lens focussed correctly. Simply inexcusable.

 

This is exactly my painful experience also, four brand new lenses need to be sent to Leica for focus calibration.

 

Three of them needed to go two times each, before the problem was fixed.

 

The first round, the Leica CS login said "In repair" then after some time the login info said "repair completed".

 

The lenses where returned to me without the problem being fixed.

 

Two of the lenses were accompanied by a DVD with test images documenting the problem. The DVD was returned in its sealed envelope without being opened by Leica CS.

 

The second time the lenses were sent back to Leica, the CS login said "sent to Leica QC for further control".

 

This leads me to think that this was not the case in the firs place.

 

Then after 7-8 weeks they where returned to me, now in perfect working order.

 

Almost as if Leica CS just observed that the lens looked "nice and clean", and just sent it back without doing anything the first time!?

 

This was not a single incident, but happened with three different lenses, SX35 and two different samples of SX21, in the time period from late April 2009 to late July 2009.

 

Next week my three week old NX 50/095 will get the same treatment!?

 

If you wonder if the problem could be my M9, the answer is no.

 

The lenses where tested on two other M9s with the same result, also my other M lenses, all focus accurately.

 

Best regards

 

Trond

[vanhulsenbeek]

This is exactly my painful experience also, four brand new lenses need to be sent to Leica for focus calibration....................

 

Oeps, Mr Daniel, as well as the other Leica Management, are in for a sleepless weekend and some soul searching next week, I would expect.

 

If they have read that

[Guest trond]

I know what you are getting at regarding size and weight, but it seems that making the lenses smaller also is a limitation causing a trade-off. (Pink corners, vignetting - do they distort?) The 17 and 24 TSEs have virtually no distortion and no c/a and vignetting isn't bad. Being a tilt/shift design is another reason for the large size. But my point is that Canon and Nikon are capable of making extremely good w/a lenses and seems to be moving in that direction now that customers want it and seem willing to pay the price. (Size, weight and $$s)

 

In any case I'm not disputing that people really like the Leica lenses, just that others have gotten along without Leicas. So one isn't really forced to put up with Leica if one is unhappy for whatever reason. Anyway, I suspect that many M users also have a DSLR system, so they don't have to depend on the Leica for all their photography needs. Thus they can put up with waiting for a lens or service.

 

 

I partly agree to that Alan!

 

The short lens flange to sensor distance is what gives Leca lenses a small size.

 

However, the same short distance, also cause the color shift and severe vignetting.

 

Except for the two new TSE lenses from Canon, wide angle lenses from Canon is no match for Leica´s counter part, and the EF 16-35 f2.8 L II is a very poor performer in terms of sharpness outside a limited central area.

 

The Nikon 14-24 f 2.8 is a stellar performer, and I wish Canon would release something similar.

 

For longer lenses, f.ex the very cheap Canon EF 85 f1.8 is a really good performer, quite close to the 10x more expensive Leica 90 AA Cron.

 

Except for the TSE lenses, after getting the M9, I only use the Canon for macro and long lens work.

 

My Leica M9 gets all the work from 90mm and wider.

 

Best regards

 

Trond

[biglouis]

If you were on Canon and Nikon forums, you would know that they have as many, if not more, problems with quality control. Before you decide to switch systems, be sure and compare a wide angle shot from any Canon or Nikon with one from a Leica M9. Examine the photo corner to corner at 100%. I don't think there is any way you would choose either over a Leica M9. Just saying!

 

Tina

 

Sorry, Tina but I think you are wrong. I do haunt other forums and I have trawled them for horror stories assuming that if I desert Leica for another camera system all I will be doing is going from one problem system to another.

 

The only issue I can recall really dominating the forums were the issues with the Canon IdMkIII, which in any case is a camera I'd never think of purchasing. If I recall correctly those problems surfaced quickly and Canon were quick to admit them and attempt to improve them with firmware releases. I know Japanese consumer electronics work on short product life cycles but I think the introduction of MkIV was even more rapid as a result.

 

In fact I thought I would do a quick Google of 'D700 problem' just in case I was deluding myself and the only post I can find is of a hoaxer back in 2008 who trolled in various forums about issues that turned out to be false.

 

Try a similar google of "Leica M9 problem" and the results speak for themselves.

 

I'm not trying to throw darts but a well observed effect in marketing is that a satisfied customer will tell 2-3 people of their positive experiences but an unsatisfied customer will tell 8-9 of their bad experiences and Canon and Nikon forums are not abuzz with disatisfaction like I see here.

[Tina Manley]

I guess we'll just have to disagree about this. I'm basing my opinion on personal experience. I've been using Leica cameras professionally for over 30 years and have always been impressed with their quality control. From the M3 to the M9, I've sent mine in only for CLA. I had the shutter stick on my M8 after I dropped it on a marble floor in India. Leica repaired and returned it quickly: My M8 looks like this

 

 

but works fine. After my M7 and before my M8, I had to switch to digital. Leica didn't have one out so I went with Canon. I now have the 1DMIII and the 5DII with an assortment of L lenses. Both cameras have been back to Canon several times. My 24/1.4L lens completely quit working. The 85/1.2 had to be exchanged. The Canon wides suffer so much from CA and fringing that I can't use them for stock. I've recently gotten a Visoflex so I don't have to use the Canons for long lenses or macro either! I regret ever buying the Canons. I don't regret buying anything with a red dot on it. But of course, YMMV!

 

Tina

[RSL]

...after all these are not cheap low-tech items, they are a premium product.

 

Afraid not, Pete. Leica's film cameras were indeed a relatively expensive, premium product, but though their digital cameras are still relatively expensive they're no longer a premium product unless price is your only criterion for the term "premium." I've been waiting a long time now for Leica to get their act together so I can have a fine rangefinder back in my hands, but I've finally given up. I'll simply continue with my Nikons, which are bigger and heavier than I'd like, but that produce at least as good photographs as any Leica, opinions to the contrary notwithstanding. On the other hand there are advances being made in mirrorless cameras as follow-ons to cameras such as the Olympus E-P1 and 2 that are going to blow Leica right out of the water as far as actual photography is concerned. Of course the collectors will continue to collect. Who knows, maybe there are enough of them to keep Leica in business.

[AlanG]

That is painful! My sympathies! I had my 75 Cron adjusted too, and just trusted what I got back. It now seems OK

 

It seems we are at the cutting edge between mechanical and digital. Mastering that and also coping with increasing customer demand must create major headaches at Solms. They have my sympathy as well!

 

 

That may be an issue for the M9s but Leica but the lenses are entirely mechanical using the same technology that Leica supposedly mastered long ago. So shipping poorly adjusted new lenses, or not correctly adjusting a lens that was sent to them, is not a result of taxing their abilities, it is just being sloppy

[wstotler]

My M8 looks like this

 

 

Tina

 

Bravo! Your M8 looks awesome. Was this the one that took the bath?

 

Cheers,

Will

[Tina Manley]

Yes, it's had several baths, including the complete submersion in the river in Honduras. I did send it in this year to have it upgraded with a new sapphire LCD panel and new shutter and Leica cleaned it up considerably (I think they were probably appalled at its appearance) and it's much prettier now, but it never stopped working. My two M8's are still going strong, but I reach for the M9 most of the time now.

 

Tina

[mooky]

Afraid not, Pete. Leica's film cameras were indeed a relatively expensive, premium product, but though their digital cameras are still relatively expensive they're no longer a premium product unless price is your only criterion for the term "premium." I've been waiting a long time now for Leica to get their act together so I can have a fine rangefinder back in my hands, but I've finally given up. I'll simply continue with my Nikons, which are bigger and heavier than I'd like, but that produce at least as good photographs as any Leica, opinions to the contrary notwithstanding. On the other hand there are advances being made in mirrorless cameras as follow-ons to cameras such as the Olympus E-P1 and 2 that are going to blow Leica right out of the water as far as actual photography is concerned. Of course the collectors will continue to collect. Who knows, maybe there are enough of them to keep Leica in business.

 

What does 'actual photography' mean,,,,,,,,just curious.

[zlatkob]

I also own the Canon 35mm f 1.4L, after comparing the IQ with the Leica Summilux 35mm ASPH, I got so depressed on behalf of Canon, and never used the 35mm f1.4L again.

 

I don't know what you photograph, but I've found both of these to be great lenses for my work. They are both wonderfully sharp and draw so beautifully. The Canon performed slightly better than the Leica in Photodo's MTF tests:

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 L USM

Leica Summilux-M Asph.35mm f/1.4

[ozdavid]

Tina,

 

Can you excuse my ignorance but what is the device (I assume it is some form of brass thumb grip) you have attached to the back of your battle scarred M8.

 

Do you find it helps your grip significantly?

Regards

David

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Tina Manley]

That's a Thumb's Up. It's great. I have one on all of my Leica rangefinders.

 

match Technical Services - help

 

I can hold the camera much steadier with it.

 

Tina

[Guest trond]

I don't know what you photograph, but I've found both of these to be great lenses for my work. They are both wonderfully sharp and draw so beautifully. The Canon performed slightly better than the Leica in Photodo's MTF tests:

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 L USM

Leica Summilux-M Asph.35mm f/1.4

 

Dear Zlatkob,

 

I find my 35/1.4L to be very sharp in the central area, but sharpness drops quite quickly towards the edges/corners compared to the Summilux 35 ASPH.

 

The 35/1.4L needs to be stopped down to at least f5.6 to get reasonable sharpness in the corner area.

 

Best regards

 

Trond