Leica complaint

[DFV]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've read some "interesting" threads on this forum in my time, but this one is one of the more "interesting".

 

Of course things like this shouldn't happen, but when products are made by humans, they do. The dealer sorted the whole problem out by return. That's excellent.

 

IMHO, this should be a GOOD NEWS thread, not yet another opportunity for the usual suspects to wade in and bash Leica.

 

+1

[Advertisement]

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

[250swb]

IMHO, this should be a GOOD NEWS thread, not yet another opportunity for the usual suspects to wade in and bash Leica.

 

Well I'm not so sure the usual apologists for eveything Leica do come out looking very good either. The OP has had his arse well and truly kicked and quite rightly. But then its been kicked again, and again, and then the usual brave suspects join in and kick it again because he's already on the floor so an easy target. A Friday feeding frenzy, but as you say, Leica come out of it looking good, the law of the jungle is upheld, so everything is normal and fab. There is a common denominator that sets off threads like this, I'm just surprised a 'moderator' can't see it, are there any around?

 

Steve

[Guest BigSplash]

I've read some "interesting" threads on this forum in my time, but this one is one of the more "interesting".

 

Of course things like this shouldn't happen, but when products are made by humans, they do. The dealer sorted the whole problem out by return. That's excellent.

 

IMHO, this should be a GOOD NEWS thread, not yet another opportunity for the usual suspects to wade in and bash Leica.

 

Andy I agree the bashing of the OP in thread after thread by the usual guys is deplorable, and I had hoped had been stopped. It is VERY GOOD NEWS that the OP issue has been resolved by the dealer. The OP has had his new M9 replaced with another new M9 that now works with his current set of lenses. Superb and the kind of service we have all come to expect from Leica.

 

However in my view the thread does raise issues that I was not aware of and we are told that Leica are aware. I have no idea how big an issue this really is.

 

Should I read in your comment that it is bashing Leica to ask if it is true that apparently if you buy a M9, you may need to get the dealer to change it until you find one that works with your old lenses, or that you should expect to tweak a new camera M mount springs to fit a 50mm f1.4 ASPH current production lens.

 

What happens if you buy a M9 now and in 3 years buy a secondhand M lens that will not fit? Are these not legitimate questions that are NOT Leica bashing. I have 12 Leica lenses and have always assumed that with just the well known 2-3 exceptions any M lens will fit the M9.

[andybarton]

I am willing to bet that this is (more or less) a "one-off". Suggesting that Leica take the camera back and then change the tolerances on all future Leica lenses seems a bit extreme to me .

[Guest BigSplash]

Well I'm not so sure the usual apologists for eveything Leica do come out looking very good either. The OP has had his arse well and truly kicked and quite rightly. But then its been kicked again, and again, and then the usual brave suspects join in and kick it again because he's already on the floor so an easy target. A Friday feeding frenzy, but as you say, Leica come out of it looking good, the law of the jungle is upheld, so everything is normal and fab. There is a common denominator that sets off threads like this, I'm just surprised a 'moderator' can't see it, are there any around?

 

Steve

 

Steve I agree with you . The OP gets kicked, and kicked. Leica dealer fixes the issue.

 

I personally have learned something from the thread that I did not know and surely the forum is about sharing these Leica experiences and knowledge. I resent any suggestion that identifying deficiencies or improvements that could be made with respect to a Leica product is Leica bashing.

 

As for the moderation I have made my comments directly..they are around but so far have accepted people bashing, personal attacks etc as OK. I am surprised that on this occassion it is not me that was personally attacked but the OP:rolleyes:

[andybarton]

Rather than set up a Leica bashing sub-section, I think that we should set up Mod-bashing section.

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am willing to bet that this is (more or less) a "one-off". Suggesting that Leica take the camera back and then change the tolerances on all future Leica lenses seems a bit extreme to me .

 

 

Andy I hope you are right, I really do. As I said i was not aware of any M Mount issue in fact I have always felt that after 30 years they by now have got it as perfect as any mount can be.

Can you then explain the 50f1.4 ASPH lens that needed a M9 mount spring to be tweaked and that this is we are told a KNOWN PROBLEM at Leica.

 

How do you come to a conclusion that this is a one off, unless the statement is wrong?

[pico]

Not again? [...] Ok, let's get started. You bought a camera. Not a heart valve. Why do you care if Stephan Daniels calls you? You got a new camera. What do you want? [...]

 

Isn't it rather like buying a new BMW only to have a wheel fall off while leaving the lot?

 

Come on. It's a serious issue.

[andybarton]

I seriously think that you are making a mountain out of mole hill here Frank and I am amazed that, as a qualified engineer, you cannot see the wood for the trees. It cannot be a common problem, or we would hear about this a lot.

 

It might well be a "known problem" as you say. Leica might know that one in 10,000 bodies and lenses don't quite match properly. I don't know. I have no idea whether it's a known problem or not, and neither do you, but it's the first time I have heard of this problem. Andy (wizard) whose word I would trust, has obviously come across this before. However, what we don't know and it's pointless guessing, is how often this happens.

 

This doesn't make it a serious problem or one that requires a wholesale redesign of the lens mount or camera mount. IMHO.

[andybarton]

Isn't it rather like buying a new BMW only to have a wheel fall off while leaving the lot?

 

Come on. It's a serious issue.

 

No. It isn't. No one is going to die if a lens doesn't mount properly.

 

It happens. It could happen with any other hand built item. It's not even a serious issue, because the dealer replaced the camera immediately with one that works properly. That should have been the end of the story.

[SJP]

You could even argue that occasional not fitting is a good thing as it indicates that the tolerances are kept tight - i.e. they did not compromise by introducing too much slack in the design.

[wizard]

Is this problem unique to the 50f2 and 50f1.4 ASPH mentioned here?

 

Frank, I experienced this with a 50f1.4 ASPH, but it could happen with any other lens I assume, as it is related to the mount and not the lens itself. Actually, as I pointed out, the lens does not need to be touched anyway, it is enough to change the position of a certain spring on the camera somewhat.

 

And please do me a favour and stop shouting that this is a problem known to Leica. I didn't say that, the problem was known to me personally and I do not consider it to be anything serious. It's like the door of a new car that does not shut as easily as you would like it to. You get the thing adjusted and everything is fine. It is not a design flaw, it's just a matter of tolerances.

 

Andy

 

P.S.: I just see Stephen's post above, and I fully agree with him.

[Guest BigSplash]

I seriously think that you are making a mountain out of mole hill here Frank and I am amazed that, as a qualified engineer, you cannot see the wood for the trees. It cannot be a common problem, or we would hear about this a lot.

 

It might well be a "known problem" as you say. Leica might know that one in 10,000 bodies and lenses don't quite match properly. I don't know. I have no idea whether it's a known problem or not, and neither do you, but it's the first time I have heard of this problem. Andy (wizard) whose word I would trust, has obviously come across this before. However, what we don't know and it's pointless guessing, is how often this happens.

 

This doesn't make it a serious problem or one that requires a wholesale redesign of the lens mount or camera mount. IMHO.

 

Andy who has anywhere suggested a wholesale redesign of the M Mount? What has been eluded to is that using 3 sigma it could be that the tolerances need adjusting on the M9. If this is a 1 in 10,000 issue I agree who cares.

 

If it is a known problem that is also easily fixed by tweaking a spring then maybe this something that can be adjusted for within QC.

 

What I do not understand is how my questions are suggested as leica bashing and the only bashing that has been going on is with respect to the OP. I also am intrigued why this issue is not something that should be of interest to many people on the forum without having any accusation of bashing Leica.

[bill]

Today's main news headline:

 

The sky isn't falling. Again.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[andybarton]

Frank:

 

I don't know what 3 Sigma is, so you have an advantage over me there.

 

You were the one that suggested that Leica might need to redesign the mount (which uis what adjusting the tolerances would entail.) Chances are that should tolerances be adjusted, then there would be more complaints of ill fitting lenses, or loose lenses etc, rather than fewer.

 

However, as has already been pointed out to you, we have no idea the extent of this issue (I hesitate to call it a problem), nor whether this is a "known issue". You are the one who has jumped to that conclusion.

[earleygallery]

Isn't it rather like buying a new BMW only to have a wheel fall off while leaving the lot?

 

Come on. It's a serious issue.

 

No, more like the rear badge falling off.

[bill]

By the way, I would like to take this opportunity to announce that all my lenses fit my new MP4 perfectly...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Guest BigSplash]

Frank:

 

I don't know what 3 Sigma is, so you have an advantage over me there.

 

You were the one that suggested that Leica might need to redesign the mount (which uis what adjusting the tolerances would entail.) Chances are that should tolerances be adjusted, then there would be more complaints of ill fitting lenses, or loose lenses etc, rather than fewer.

 

However, as has already been pointed out to you, we have no idea the extent of this issue (I hesitate to call it a problem), nor whether this is a "known issue". You are the one who has jumped to that conclusion.

 

Andy 3 sigma is a statistical approach initiated by Motorola that defines essentially the tolerances that manufacturing need to meet. It is driven by client feedback on what works and does not work to achieve yields and other parametrics. We can argue about that definition but that essentially is what we are discussing here in my view.

 

So on that basis we are absolutely not discuusing a redesign for the M mount. What we "maybe" looking at within a quality consciuos company is obtaining accurate data on how the 1st new M9 failed to match an old lens and why a new M9 may need its spring adjusting to fit a current 50f1.4 ASPH lens .......this should be of great interest IMHO to Solms so that they can either push for a wider or indeed tighter tolerance for the spring in question. This in the industry is called "continuous improvement""

 

I would add that if this particular issue is No1000 on a pareto analysis of issues relative to the M9, (which given my and your surprise that it surfaced as an issue is probably the case) why should Solms bother to fix?

 

We all know that issues occassionally surface here and long may that continue. In that way Solms have a fast track feedback of people who actually use the M9 etc. and this can provide valuable feedback at a user and product level. Otherwise how can they improve and increase quality year to year, which I hope is a desire for active forum members.

 

What I find unacceptable is that raising a product issue somehow becomes Leica bashing, rather than Leica enhancing!

 

I find it as a none M9 user, nor owner but potential owner of M9 or M10 (when it comes) as someone who is acutely interested in Leica continuously improving their products from a very high level already. I value inputs from those that actually have first hand experience (or the technical background / experience) to add value.

 

I find it deplorable that the OP here has been attacked at a personal level by the usual guys for giving us his personal experience.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pico]

Isn't it rather like buying a new BMW only to have a wheel fall off while leaving the lot?

 

Come on. It's a serious issue.

 

No, more like the rear badge falling off.

 

Aw, that's actually a cost-saver. I remove the badges on all my cars. Sometimes I just use black tape.

[delander †]

Well if this had happened to me and the dealer had sorted it immediately I would not even think of contacting Leica, but I'm pretty sure the dealer did and that is what counts.

 

Jeff