jaapv Posted September 2, 2008 Share #361 Posted September 2, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thank you very much for your reply Mr. Daniel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 Hi jaapv, Take a look here M9 on tripod - bottom part broken anyone else ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Shootist Posted September 2, 2008 Share #362 Posted September 2, 2008 Thank you Mr Daniel for your clarification and to Leica as a company. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted September 2, 2008 Share #363 Posted September 2, 2008 In my opinion, you can't say fairer than that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DuquesneG Posted September 2, 2008 Share #364 Posted September 2, 2008 Agreed. So it's OK to put my M8s vertically on a tripod again....yay!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hookeye Posted September 2, 2008 Share #365 Posted September 2, 2008 Great! I am very happy about Mr Daniel's response. This is just what I would have hoped for. And five cameras so far - that is only a minor issue. What a relief. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac11 Posted September 2, 2008 Share #366 Posted September 2, 2008 Well, that lifted the weight from my shoulders. Was considering how to reply to my hefty repair estimate. Guess this means I will be contacted as one of those five owners getting their cameras fixed under warranty. Though some in this thread have reacted negatively, I refrained from arguing back, since I did not want to flood this thread with my posts. It seems Leica is trying to stay observant of users' cmments, and making clear cut decisions when needed. oslo terry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted September 2, 2008 Share #367 Posted September 2, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Huge kudos to Stephan Daniel and Leica for taking this positive step and looking after its customers. I can't help thinking that it's unlikely that other camera manufacturers would have done the same, irrespective of their size ... Common sense prevails. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted September 3, 2008 Share #368 Posted September 3, 2008 1) Thanks, Stefan! 2) Thanks, Andreas! 3) Leica is known for treating its customers fairly. 4) Anyone notice? On the forum there are about four examples of this fracture, and Herr Daniel said there are about five cameras which have shown the problem. That is, a big part of people with this problem are represented on the forum. There is not a major number of cameras displaying the damage that we are unaware of. That means: 4a) This is a place that a lot of folks know about. 4b) Leica does not build flimsy equipment. 5) We need to keep this thread in mind when someone uses the argument: "Well, if we know of twenty cases on the forum, who knows how many more cases there are that we're unaware of? I bet it's quite a lot." 6) It wouldn't be statistically valid to draw broad conclusions from one instance. But I know we also had a lot of speculation on the thread about how many cases we were unaware of, and we now know: Not many. 7) Thank you, Leica! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfrey Posted September 5, 2008 Share #369 Posted September 5, 2008 Something to watch for with these cameras. I was checking the focus of my 50 f1.4ASPH, and had the camera tilted forward and it suddenly came off the tripod. I thought I had forgotten to close the clamp on the tripod head, but when I looked at the camera I could see what happened. I don’t know if this was just metal fatigue with my particular camera (which has never been dropped or abused), or an inherent design weakness. Other pictures are here: Metal failure Bill Bill, I wrote that I had the same problem with the baseplate breaking loose. I sent it to Leica for warranty repair and they refused saying it showed signs of misuse. Then I read that the Leica CEO wrote a letter apologizing to owners that had this problem but they claim to have never seen this before. Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 5, 2008 Share #370 Posted September 5, 2008 ...Leica is known for treating its customers fairly... Took 19 pages of this thread for Leica to state the obvious though. A defect is a defect, must be repaired for free that's all. Well all's well that ends well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted September 5, 2008 Share #371 Posted September 5, 2008 Bill,I wrote that I had the same problem with the baseplate breaking loose. I sent it to Leica for warranty repair and they refused saying it showed signs of misuse. Then I read that the Leica CEO wrote a letter apologizing to owners that had this problem but they claim to have never seen this before. Matt Godfrey/Matt thank you for replying to this thread. There have been some wild speculations about your first post reporting your bodies base plate locking lug failure. As you have read there have been at least 5 of these reported and sent in for repair. Personally I don't care why it failed, it shouldn't of, and Leica's original response to you that you had misused the camera was totally off the wall. It is clearly a design fault. The locking lug should of never been placed on the exterior of the body shell. It should of been like all the film M's with the lug that hold on the base plate on the interior and made of something stronger then the metal body casting is made of. I expect there will be more of this type of failure in the future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted September 5, 2008 Share #372 Posted September 5, 2008 Excellent response from Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted September 5, 2008 Share #373 Posted September 5, 2008 I expect there will be more of this type of failure in the future. Yes, and ultimately we will all die....horribly. Pile of s**** Asumming the numbers are correct then we are dealing with 5 out of approximately thirty thousand cameras, where some might be true failures and others are from impact or other causes. We and Leica have no way to distinguish one from the other but for the sake of argument let's take the maximum: 5/30.000 = 15/100.000 = 1.5/10.000 = 1.5/100 % = 0.015 % (yep, this is a rough calculation, feel free to use a pocket calculator if you want more decimals) Big deal! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted September 5, 2008 Share #374 Posted September 5, 2008 What are the odds that 4 body castings would fail and just happen to be exclusively among the readers of this M8 forum? Alan posted this comment back in post #271 and my response at the time was: "Perhaps reasonable since this is where a high proportion of M8 users congregate. I'm not suggesting that there aren't others 'in the wild' but there's no evidence to suggest that this problem is endemic yet is there? But if, for instance, Leica had said to me before I purchased my M8 that: "Out of every 20,000 M8s we make the castings on 4 of them will fail and we'll replace the camera." then I would have still bought the M8. If they'd said 1,000 out of every 20,000 then I might not have bought it. Each of us will have a figure that we would deem acceptable but I'd guess that we're nowhere near that figure on the confirmed reports that have emerged so far." For the record I stand by the comment I posted then that I still would have bought my M8 if I'd known of the 5 body shell failures that Stephan Daniel recently quoted. I can't justify a second M8 but if I managed to convince myself that I did then the 5 failures would not alter my decision. Things break. Life goes on. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted September 5, 2008 Share #375 Posted September 5, 2008 Yes, and ultimately we will all die....horribly. Pile of s**** Asumming the numbers are correct then we are dealing with 5 out of approximately thirty thousand cameras, where some might be true failures and others are from impact or other causes. We and Leica have no way to distinguish one from the other but for the sake of argument let's take the maximum: 5/30.000 = 15/100.000 = 1.5/10.000 = 1.5/100 % = 0.015 % (yep, this is a rough calculation, feel free to use a pocket calculator if you want more decimals) Big deal! How often do you use your M8 on a tripod? How often does any M user use there M cameras on a tripod? About the only time I use a tripod with the M's is at night or if I'm doing some tests. But that doesn't mean that others use there M8 on a tripod all the time. Over time these types of failure may occure if the camera is regulary used on a tripod. Only time will tell. Pile of s****? Looked in the mirror lately. Now that Leica has replied with a solid answer I will not be bothered using the M8 on a tripod whenever I think it is necessary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted September 5, 2008 Share #376 Posted September 5, 2008 The point being dear mr. Shootist is that if we have 0.0015% or whatever failures from indeterminate causes it might be useful to stop worrying and/or complaining that the design sucks. At least for the time being. If the failure rate pics up substantially then I can always decide to convert to risk management mode later Meanwhile I will use it on the tripod if I want to thank you very much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted September 5, 2008 Share #377 Posted September 5, 2008 Yes, and ultimately we will all die....horribly. Pile of s**** Asumming the numbers are correct then we are dealing with 5 out of approximately thirty thousand cameras, where some might be true failures and others are from impact or other causes. We and Leica have no way to distinguish one from the other but for the sake of argument let's take the maximum: 5/30.000 = 15/100.000 = 1.5/10.000 = 1.5/100 % = 0.015 % (yep, this is a rough calculation, feel free to use a pocket calculator if you want more decimals) Big deal! Are you aware of any other make or model of camera that broke causing it to fall off of a tripod? Your statement connecting the M8 base failure with death is not clear. Do you mean that base plate failure is inevitable too? Or do you simply mean this isn't so bad considering we will each die someday? I bet base plate mounting failure is inevitable for at least a few or even many more cases. What is the likelihood that the only cameras that will fail already have done so? How would you come up with those odds? What makes the failed cameras different from those that have not failed? You call what you are writing statistics? Perhaps, but how useful are they? Certainly not valid enough to make your point. First of all 5/30,000 equals 15/90,000 not 15/100,000. Second you only have Leica's word that there have been 5 cases. Previous reports from Leica stated that they had never seen this before. Do you really think that 4/5ths of all problem cameras belong to members of this forum? What are the odds? Third, do you know for sure that there have been 30,000 M8s sold to users? Fourth and most important, how heavily used are all of those cameras - e.g. how many on off cycles have the base plates gone through and how many times have they been used on a tripod with what amounts of force placed against them? (I don't know what level of force you would consider abuse, but I think any camera mounted to a tripod should be able to withstand significant force that tries to pull it away from the tripod. Damage resulting simply from dropping the camera, unrelated to tripod mounting, should be detectable as impact damage - even by Leica or anyone else.) Fifth, a small percentage of failures may not be meaningful to you but are very meaningful to me and perhaps to others as well. Just looking at the design I feel that securing the tripod to a removable plate that is barely anchored to the camera via a small thin flap of magnesium, does not fill me with any level of confidence for the camera at all. And I have owned hundreds of cameras including several Leicas. One also has to weigh this "statistic" along with the odds of a shutter failure or some other reported occasional defect or problem that may cause the camera to be away for repair for a period of time. And then you can calculate an overall level of reliability should you or anyone have the actual data. To come full circle to your death analogy and using your statistics... If every time you got into an airplane you had a 1 in 6,000 chance of dying, would you give up flying? So in some cases, odds are only as important as the value you put on the consequences. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted September 5, 2008 Share #378 Posted September 5, 2008 The fact that we will all die and the fact that more cameras will fail are both truisms i.e. statements with little useful content. If anyone chooses to dwell on issues that for the time being appear insignificant (to me, based on the numbers) then I wish them well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 5, 2008 Share #379 Posted September 5, 2008 Plus: the most likely cause of failure is the incorrect positioning of the baseplate at an earlier point of time, causing microcracks which weaken the material to a point that it fails under the normal load of mounting the camera on a tripod. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philinflash Posted September 6, 2008 Share #380 Posted September 6, 2008 If this failure rate (as computed above) is in the ballpark and if the company continues to respond as they say they will, it seems to me that a fair balance has been struck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.