Guest M8-Freak Posted February 26, 2007 Share #1  Posted February 26, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello dear M8-User,  in a discussion with Leica I experienced straight that Leica will not bring the v1.1 this month. At the earliest in a few weeks. A version 1.091 will come the other problems to solve is. This will not solve the problem in the WA-Area with IR-Filters.  Sorry, but that is the conditions of the things. Greetings from the Freak  P.S.: Sorry for my bad english, I am from Germany Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted February 26, 2007 Share #2 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Thank you for reporting. I don't think too many of us are fazed by extra time for 1.10. Better to get it right rather than rush the result. Do you know what the 1.091 you reported will deliver? Â No need to apologize for your English. It is better than some here. Â My Germanis virtually non-existent. I can order a beer and find a bed or the train station. That is my survival strategy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
strick Posted February 26, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted February 26, 2007 I can order a beer and find a bed or the train station. Â Â Fine - that's all you need :-) Â Cheers, Greg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 26, 2007 Share #4  Posted February 26, 2007 Hello dear M8-User, in a discussion with Leica I experienced straight that Leica will not bring the v1.1 this month. At the earliest in a few weeks. A version 1.091 will come the other problems to solve is. This will not solve the problem in the WA-Area with IR-Filters.  Sorry, but that is the conditions of the things. Greetings from the Freak  P.S.: Sorry for my bad english, I am from Germany  I hope this expectations on v 1.1 (and then there may be 1.2 or 1.21...) will not start to abound in this forum... I work in IT and the statement "it will be fixed in the next release..." is a sort of perennial joking between people in the business... has became de facto an identifier of how much remains always undefined-unresolved-unaffordable in what is called the High Tech sector...; I love a lot my M4 and related gear also for they represent an OUTING from which is my day-by-day world... and I hope that we and Leica Co. will escape form this maleficious mood of "..wait for the next release..." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Campbell Posted February 26, 2007 Share #5 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Ok with me. I'm not interested in v1.10 until it's finished! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterv Posted February 26, 2007 Share #6 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Thanks M8-freak. Â Ok with me. I'm not interested in v1.10 until it's finished! Â Couldn't agree more! Â I've been expecting some anger and also lot of nagging towards the end february... Please, let's give them some time... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 26, 2007 Share #7 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, I will certainly not download this 1.91. The cameras are running fine as it is. Even 1.10, I will wait some weeks after it appears... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
parigby Posted February 26, 2007 Share #8 Â Posted February 26, 2007 I understand what people are saying, and l too agree that l would prefer version 1.10 to be right, rather than than another defective piece of work coming out of Solms. Â What l can't understand is an almost universal acceptance of a defective product. It's almost as though Leica have done us a favour in releasing it in the first place. Â Leica are taking huge advantage of it's loyal customer base that has stuck with it through thick and thin. You almost get the feeling that the powers in Solms have sat there, shrugged their collective shoulders and said, don't worry about them, they'll wait, afterall there's really no where else they can go. Â At this stage Leica know whether they will be able to release by the end of February. Why not just come out officially and say either " great news, it's on the way " or " sorry chaps, it's not yet ready it's likely to be more towards the end of March ". It's not much to ask is it ? Â Leica could do with taking on board my company philosophy in relation to clients " at some stage it is inevitable that we will cock up - what is not inevitable is that you the client should suffer inconvenience or loss from that cock up ". Look and learn Leica. Â Surely our collective loyalty deserves an official update at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 26, 2007 Share #9 Â Posted February 26, 2007 I understand what people are saying, and l too agree that l would prefer version 1.10 to be right, rather than than another defective piece of work coming out of Solms. Â What l can't understand is an almost universal acceptance of a defective product. It's almost as though Leica have done us a favour in releasing it in the first place. Â Leica are taking huge advantage of it's loyal customer base that has stuck with it through thick and thin. You almost get the feeling that the powers in Solms have sat there, shrugged their collective shoulders and said, don't worry about them, they'll wait, afterall there's really no where else they can go. Â At this stage Leica know whether they will be able to release by the end of February. Why not just come out officially and say either " great news, it's on the way " or " sorry chaps, it's not yet ready it's likely to be more towards the end of March ". It's not much to ask is it ? Â Leica could do with taking on board my company philosophy in relation to clients " at some stage it is inevitable that we will cock up - what is not inevitable is that you the client should suffer inconvenience or loss from that cock up ". Look and learn Leica. Â Surely our collective loyalty deserves an official update at least. Â Well, my world would be a far better one if all other equipment I use were as this "defective" one which has been performing without hiccups since I bought the first one on Nov. 17th, and flawlessly since its upgrade and my January camera.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted February 26, 2007 Share #10 Â Posted February 26, 2007 If people find a problem in my software (perish the thought!), I like to explain to them that it's a "code timing" problem. Â They nod sagely, thinking there is some intricate technicality I'm wrestling with, where actually, what I mean is that the code was shipped before testing was complete and they found the problem before we did or that, sometimes (blush), we haven't even written that bit yet... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted February 26, 2007 Share #11 Â Posted February 26, 2007 ......What l can't understand is an almost universal acceptance of a defective product. It's almost as though Leica have done us a favour in releasing it in the first place........Leica are taking huge advantage of it's loyal customer base that has stuck with it through thick and thin. Â Philip - Careful now, we brother heretic customers can draw a lot of flak here when stating what we see as self evident and bleeding obvious. I suspect that you, like me, when outside of the politely genteel atmosphere of this forum use a far more robust language when describing Leica's cockup culture. We all want the next firmware to be correctly structured of course, but frankly my diminishing trust in Leica would be more improved by a company house-clean than by version 1.1. Â ....................Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 26, 2007 Share #12 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Well, I will certainly not download this 1.91. The cameras are running fine as it is. Even 1.10, I will wait some weeks after it appears... Â Â Hmmm you may want 1.091 installed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steich Posted February 26, 2007 Share #13  Posted February 26, 2007 When talking to somebody at a Leica dealer in Germany, he told me that there will be some interesting features in the new firmware...and we were talking about using uncoded lenses on the M8. He didn´t want to go into details, but it sounded very promising. Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 26, 2007 Share #14 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Â What l can't understand is an almost universal acceptance of a defective product. It's almost as though Leica have done us a favour in releasing it in the first place. Â Universal acceptance of a defective product, where do you get this idea from?, most are eagerly awaiting the firmware/filter fix. Users have accepted with some reservations the requirement to shoot with IR/Cuts but in general users are impressed with the image quality from the camera. Â Leica are taking huge advantage of it's loyal customer base that has stuck with it through thick and thin. You almost get the feeling that the powers in Solms have sat there, shrugged their collective shoulders and said, don't worry about them, they'll wait, afterall there's really no where else they can go. Â For an Digital M experience, there is nowhere else to go, while there may be other digital rangefinders, with respect they do not look or feel like an M body. I for one was happy with the gesture of 30% off a lens of my choice, but I'm having difficulty deciding what to add, if at all. Â Surely our collective loyalty deserves an official update at least. Â I agree it would be nice to have an update on progress, but it would be understandable if the time was required to address the issues fully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted February 26, 2007 Share #15 Â Posted February 26, 2007 What l can't understand is an almost universal acceptance of a defective product. It's almost as though Leica have done us a favour in releasing it in the first place. Â So Phillip, when did you stop beating your wife? :-) Â Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted February 26, 2007 Share #16 Â Posted February 26, 2007 The IR filters are much more important than the firmware, in my opinion. Wide-angle lenses need (to some extent) the new firmware, but the IR contamination problem affect all the lenses and many pictures (it is not true that this is an occasional problem). I have not received my filters yet, and February is ending (I bought my camera in November of 2006). If I would have known all these problems in advance, I wouldn't have bought the camera in November. I would have wait until March or April. Many of us would have done the same. But this is the current situation. I accept the solution offered by Leica (IR filters and new firmware), because using IR filters the main problem is solved. I am not very happy, but I try to be patient. I have no alternatives either. I don't "accept" a defective product but it is a temporal situation and, what can I do? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted February 26, 2007 Share #17 Â Posted February 26, 2007 I don't quite understand the anger and use of terms like "defective". Yes the camera is less than perfect, but it is really quite good and they will hopefully make it better with the new firmware. Someone once said that "disappointment is a function of expectation". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
parigby Posted February 26, 2007 Share #18 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Larry, Â To stop you have to start. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
parigby Posted February 26, 2007 Share #19 Â Posted February 26, 2007 Alan, Â There is no anger, just frustration. Are you really suggesting that even with all these cameras being returned to Leica and being replaced, with a firmware fix, with the provision of IR filters, the camera is not defective ? Â Remeber there are a lot of people of on this forum with experience of Leica and their firmware fixes ( DMR ). Â As l said towards the end of the post, a nice little official communication would be nice, but this seems to be just too much trouble for Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted February 26, 2007 Share #20  Posted February 26, 2007 Alan, There is no anger, just frustration. Are you really suggesting that even with all these cameras being returned to Leica and being replaced, with a firmware fix, with the provision of IR filters, the camera is not defective ?  Remeber there are a lot of people of on this forum with experience of Leica and their firmware fixes ( DMR ).  As l said towards the end of the post, a nice little official communication would be nice, but this seems to be just too much trouble for Leica.  We're quibbling about the terms to describe the severity of the problems, but there is no quibble that Leica has not communicated well. When I had a bad battery, they were responsive and customer friendly. Its the big picture in which they appear not well-versed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.