Leica's Quality Control Continues to Disappoint

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Time I bought a couple of you old timers one of these.

 

Brakspears

 

Old-timers? You ain't no springchicken, sir:p Thanks for the beer

[Advertisement]

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

[michali]

The frenzy is in the minds of those, such as yourself, who have missed the point of the discussion and just want it to go away. From the outset, your side of the debate has sought to ramp up the emotional temperature with talk of internet frenzy and jeering mobs. You have taken it a step too far, in my opinion. To describe a point of view you don’t agree with as bordering on the pathological is outrageous and your implication that spending time witnessing suffering in Africa somehow validates one’s opinions on camera lens quality is as offensive as it is ridiculous.

 

Anyone who has spent any time on this forum knows the score. Any criticism of Leica, however minor and however mildly expressed, is not well tolerated. I don’t understand why it is considered so shocking to discuss Leica’s lapses from its own high standards. Is Leica a religion? Are its lenses objects of veneration? Is it sacrilege to perceive a flaw in them? No, of course not! It would be ludicrous to think in those terms. It’s just business. The relationship with the company is that of customer and supplier - nothing more.

 

Successful companies - and Leica is now a highly successful company - see customer comment as indispensable in their drive to achieve their quality goals. That can only only be to our ultimate benefit as customers. I hope and expect that Leica has a more enlightened attitude to criticism than some on this forum.

 

Selectively editing and quoting some of my comments out of context in order to try & validate your point of view, is actually what is offensive and ridiculous!

 

Read what I wrote, read it in context and not as it suits you or your argument.

 

You very clearly didn't get my point, so I'll try and simplify things;

This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with being intolerant of criticism of Leica or being Leica fanboys.

 

In my opinion it's all about keeping things in perspective and maintaining a sense of balance relative to the real world that we live in.

Given this, I ask myself whether two very small & minute bits of smudged paint on the front of a lens ring, warrant all of this energy and discussion and whether this behaviour is normal..........that's all.

[Washington]

Andy,

That beer sure looked interesting….. I’ve never seen it over here in the states.

We made really crappy beer over here until the micro-brewery movement began.

I have a theory why America made crappy beer for sooooo long, but I don’t want to

take up space with that as it’s more appropriate for the Bar.

[AlanG]

Bit like photography then, huh? 5 minutes and you're a full blown pro;).

 

It is not at all like photography because lens assembly is a clearly defined repetitive task where few variables need to be considered, not a creative one. If it involves too many steps for a typical person to learn, then perhaps split up the tasks among more people. I've taken numerous lenses apart and put them back together. The methodology seems pretty clear cut to me.

[AlanG]

In my opinion it's all about keeping things in perspective and maintaining a sense of balance relative to the real world that we live in.

Given this, I ask myself whether two very small & minute bits of smudged paint on the front of a lens ring, warrant all of this energy and discussion and whether this behaviour is normal..........that's all.

 

In the greater scheme of things this is trivial. And we can say that about lots of things that we comment on day to day. But that has nothing to do with the issue which is a discussion about quality control.

 

Keep in mind that packaged food often goes through machine imaging inspection for consistency and quality control. Potato chips (crisps) with dark spots on them and overcooked or defective cookies (biscuits) will be rejected. And this is pretty trivial too, but it is the reality of what quality assurance has come to today.

[Ronan]

I am absolutely astounded at some of the comments/reactions and the odd bit of “frenzy” generated by this thread.

Dare I say, I find that a few of the reactions and comments here are bordering on pathological!

 

After all it’s two small blobs of smudged paint we’re talking about. I agree that one doesn’t expect this from Leica blah, blah, blah........all of it absolutely correct.

But hang on a minute, it’s only two very small blobs of smudged paint, for f*#@s sake!!!

 

A couple of years ago I bought a brand new 75mm Summicron, out of the box the lens hood came off in my hand as I tried to extend it. The locking ring had not been properly screwed into place. It was a question of either shipping it back to Solms or simply pushing the ring down and then twisting until it locked into place.

 

I chose the latter course of action = problem quickly sorted out, no winging threads, no empirical conclusions on Leica’s quality control, no internet frenzy.

In the time it would have taken to photograph it, post a thread and deal with comments, I had fixed it and was out there using the lens.

 

As previously mentioned here, these objects/things are only little mechanical pieces of metal and glass assembled by humans.

These humans sometimes screw up, as we all do. Does it really warrant all of this?

The universe is not perfect, these things happen from time to time......deal with it and move on.

 

I can’t believe that this thread has generated 92 comments and +2, 700 views, when I last checked! This alone says it all; IMO we’re all in a very sad, sad state of affairs here.

 

We live in a world that is currently so screwed up at so many levels with so many millions of suffering people. This is especially true in Africa, where I live and work for a large part of the year.

 

I’ve just returned from Africa having seen and done some amazing things and conversely having witnessed some horrific scenes of suffering.

I come back to the Forum and “walk in” on this thread; I’m appalled!

 

And yes I am trivializing Mark’s lens problem, but come on guys, let’s try and keep things in perspective....

 

Enough said, I’ll get off my soapbox now, but must say as I step down, that I really can’t take any of this seriously at all.

 

Ok.

 

My family and I just contributed more money to charity than most people make in a couple years. We do this every year.

 

The point of the OP still stands.

 

I'll refer you to a couple pages back when a comment was made about it not being the end of the world. 100% agree, point of the OP still stands strong.

[johnloumiles]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Makes you wonder how it happened in the first place. There is plenty of proof out there that this is an aberration and not a systematic breakdown.

 

Photo Credit: Ralph Gibson

Publication: Leica Lens Book 2003

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!

[andybarton]

 

My family and I just contributed more money to charity than most people make in a couple years. We do this every year.

 

 

How is this relevant?

[pgk]

It is not at all like photography because lens assembly is a clearly defined repetitive task where few variables need to be considered, not a creative one. If it involves too many steps for a typical person to learn, then perhaps split up the tasks among more people. I've taken numerous lenses apart and put them back together. The methodology seems pretty clear cut to me.

Methinks that you underestimate the assembly of precision optics. Like most things in life I'd suspect that watching an experienced assembler would make it look all too easy. Assembling a lens from scratch - from the 'raw' components - is very different to taking one to pieces and reassembling it IMHO. I used to MTF test lenses many years ago - there was (and still is) variability in their performance - minimising this variability is not simply a matter of putting the bits together.

[euston]

In my opinion it's all about keeping things in perspective and maintaining a sense of balance relative to the real world that we live in.

Given this, I ask myself whether two very small & minute bits of smudged paint on the front of a lens ring, warrant all of this energy and discussion and whether this behaviour is normal..........that's all.

 

Thank you for your explanation, michali. We’ll just have to agree to differ. The only common ground on the two sides of this debate appears to be that each side believes the other to be making an unnecessary fuss.

[euston]

I’m going to leave this discussion by giving my feedback on the quality of the moderation in this thread. On the very first page a moderator came down heavily on one side of the discussion - not in a cool reasoned way but in a manner that was bound to raise the temperature. More immoderate comments followed. I don’t think this was wise in a thread that, from past experience, clearly had the potential to become heated. It is better, I believe, for moderators to exercise restraint in such circumstances in case they have a role to play in keeping the peace later on in the discussion.

[AlanG]

Methinks that you underestimate the assembly of precision optics. Like most things in life I'd suspect that watching an experienced assembler would make it look all too easy. Assembling a lens from scratch - from the 'raw' components - is very different to taking one to pieces and reassembling it IMHO. I used to MTF test lenses many years ago - there was (and still is) variability in their performance - minimising this variability is not simply a matter of putting the bits together.

 

I don't underestimate the skill required at all. Some of my view camera lenses have tiny shim rings between the shutter and a front or rear assembly that obviously required testing and measurement when mating the basic pieces together. And it is probably not uncommon to adjust the spacing between elements and groups to compensate for some variance of the elements/groups. In the old days, each element or group was measured and marked on the edge. And then the assembler would match components to take care of some of the variability. I don't know if they still do this matching or have achieved better component tolerances due to more precise machining and lens grinding (and discarding those items that are out of spec.) The more precisely made each component, the less the reliance on adjustments at time of assembly for a given level of overall lens tolerance. I don't think this is rocket science and this has been pretty common in the optics industry for many decades.

 

Yes, people need skill and training to do their jobs in a variety of fields. And after all of this time of building lenses, if Leica can't train people to do this, then there is something wrong with the manufacturing or assembly process or else they are just not getting competent people any more. In any case, you don't need to be a very skilled inspector to reject lenses that have obvious cosmetic flaws. So if even one lens slips through, there is something wrong with the inspection process in that the person who painted the ring and the one who approved the lens both missed it. (I'm making an assumption here that someone examines and approves each lens before shipment.) I don't find it plausible that the lens ring does not receive adequate time for the paint to dry and that something can later come into contact with it to smear it. If so, then that is a problem with the process. It reminds me of the example of the lens that was mounted in the barrel upside down - something that makes you scratch your head wondering how it is possible to get by the inspection and be shipped.

 

FWIW Hasselblad used to just use decals for f stops and shutter speeds on their lenses instead of engraving them. These were pretty easy to scrape off and it really made me wonder how such expensive lenses could have such cheap markings.

[roydonian]

The basic issue is not just that some paint was smeared, but that the flaw raises two questions:

 

What else may have been improperly done during the construction of this lens?

Why did no-one who handled that lens prior to shipment notice the flaw send it back for correction?

 

Yesterday I checked and approved some text for publication. It had also been checked by a copy editor. But the young lady who was tasked with converting the text into its final electric format spotted an error and immediately brought it to my attention.

 

Checking the text was not part of the task she was trying to do, but clearly she cares about the quality of the final product that the department produces. The person who put the lens cap on the original poster’s lens prior to shipment apparently did care about the quality of the final product that his or her department produces.

 

A paint smear no more affects the useability of a lens than a single ‘typo’ affected the usefulness of the text that I had approved. But we fixed the mistake.

 

Best regards,

 

Doug

[pico]

Yesterday I checked and approved some text for publication. It had also been checked by a copy editor. But the young lady who was tasked with converting the text into its final electric format spotted an error and immediately brought it to my attention.

 

My mate is the best copy editor I have known in my decades of writing and reading. She can spot errors in so many quality magazines (her business) and books. Sometimes her publisher will mark something ready, and during the formatting for publication, she finds things that just amaze her. She's given up reporting them because the publisher just gets ticked off. She fixes them and moves on.

 

Our local newspapers fired their copy editors decades ago and it shows.

 

Can Leica dealers open new deliveries to check for such obvious errors, or is that not permitted?

 

PS: FWIW - Never in forty years and many, many Leica purchases have I found a defect.

[ho_co]

... What else may have been improperly done during the construction of this lens?...

 

Doug, considering the 'go/no-go' way the lenses are assembled, the smeared paint is irrelevant to the mechanical and optical functioning of the lens.

[jaapv]

My mate is the best copy editor I have known in my decades of writing and reading. She can spot errors in so many quality magazines (her business) and books. Sometimes her publisher will mark something ready, and during the formatting for publication, she finds things that just amaze her. She's given up reporting them because the publisher just gets ticked off. She fixes them and moves on.

 

Our local newspapers fired their copy editors decades ago and it shows.

 

Can Leica dealers open new deliveries to check for such obvious errors, or is that not permitted?

 

PS: FWIW - Never in forty years and many, many Leica purchases have I found a defect.

it is permitted but the customers don't like opened boxes

[nick.edwards1]

The 100% perfect product is unaffordable and probably impossible. If you are really interested check out 'Taguchi Loss Function' and stuff like this.

 

In Quality System terms the occurrence of a problem usually launches a 'Root Cause Analysis'.

 

This analysis then demands one or more corrective actions to prevent recurrence of the problem.

 

The situation is then monitored for months and maybe years to ensure the problem has improved significantly.

 

Further analysis and corrective actions are launched and if necessary and the cycle repeats.

 

The objective is continuous and never ending improvement.

 

This whole process is subject to audit.

 

 

It amazes me how many experts we have here who judge the standards of Leica's Quality Control and even better how to fix the blob of paint problem.

 

You would be surprised how many things can and do go wrong in a manufacturing process for reasons that you would never dream of. Often the obviously simple problems are some of the most difficult to solve.

 

Today we have the internet dissecting and analysing everything.

 

Years ago and maybe still today, the rumour was if a Rolls Royce broke down - a recovery vehicle would be sent and the car would be covered with a tarpaulin because the Rolls never broke down. But that was when they used to make them down the road in Crewe. They cannot be as good now that production has moved to Goodwood -

 

Perhaps we should end this discussion as it has the potential to threaten the number of posts accumulated on 'I love my MP' - and that would never do.

 

Best regards.

 

Nick.

[pgk]

I don't underestimate the skill required at all.

I recently stripped down a dead lens from a Japanese independent lens manufacturer. I was amazed at the amount of plastic used in its construction and the absolute lack of repairability - it would have needed new sections rather thanadjustments (I could see no way in which adjustments could have been easily made and certainly not economically).

 

A hand built metal M lens is of course fully adjustable, repairable and so on. But to build/adjust or repair one must involve a high degree of understanding of the function and effect of each component - and a lens with shifting groups is a pretty complex mechanical item - rather different to a, far simpler, view camera lens. If you think that building a current M lens is a straightforward assembly operation based on simply putting tight tolerance components together then I'd say that you are wrong. If it was as simple as that then I'd suggest that there would be many more M fitting lenses from many more manufacturers. We've come a long way from the OPs cosmetic problems of paint smears, the cause of which no one here actually knows;).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[uroman]

the primary issue, is that in all the canon, nikon, sony lenses I have owned, I have never seen such an obvious QC defect... it raises questions about leica - this is an OBVIOUS defect.

 

Everyone makes mistakes - but this mistake is obvious.

 

I am sure people can come up with defects that they have seen in all sorts of lenses, but this is an expensive lens - very expensive by lens standards, and for Leica to put out a sub-par product.

 

In the end, the problem is that the lens cannot be immediately exchanged - yet another problem with Leica compared to canon, nikon, etc. Most lenses from canon or nikon, if there is a flaw, can be exchanged at my local shop Very few are special order. If I did find a defect on a canon lens, I would just take it back to the store and exchange it right then and there.

 

With leica, this is not an option, so it is even more curious.

 

But the most shocking thing of all, is that I am learning that Leica followers are often not happy with criticism of the brand. As a new leica user, I like Leica, but I am not willing to be blind to sloppiness. Especially at this price point.

 

Nevertheless, to some people, the defect is cosmetic and minor, and I can see that side of the argument. To those people, sure they can be happy. BUt that line of reasoning wont work for me. If it works for you, fine. But it wont work for me. It turns me off to the brand.

[ho_co]

Perhaps the difference is that some people understand that what makes a Leica lens isn't her skin color.