M9 on tripod - bottom part broken anyone else ?

[rob_x2004]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Its a design and materials use flaw. Hopefully the M8.2 or M9.......

[mac11]

Now let's think this through before we talk of ruining Leica with wholesale camera recalls. You have 2 reported instances out of an estimated 20,000 cameras sold, which equates to a failure rate of 0.01%....

Pete.

 

 

Well, sent mine 2 weeks ago for repair with exactly same problem.

(same as the photo on the 1st post except the golden brass portion fell off as well on mine)

Luckily I caught my camera on its fall as the same corner of the base metal plate cracked.

Really surprised to find this thread by luck just now as I usually cruise for the photos or

firmware discussions... By the way, I hail from Oslo, Norway.

 

 

oslo terry

[jamhowa]

Percent failure may be low but in a product of this level, you must expect more. This is not a cheap camera, in fact it is one of the most expensive cameras out there. Like all electronic cameras, I highly doubt this camera will last as long as my Leica III or IIIf has, but we should expect that it will last at least 10 years like my R-8. In 10 years the electronics will most likely be obsolete, but what we are looking at here is totally unacceptable.

[farnz]

Percent failure may be low but in a product of this level, you must expect more. ...

What do you mean?

[jamhowa]

Leica must repair this defect free of charge unless there is a clear case of user abuse. I think we all know that a $5,000US camera is on the upper end of all camera prices. Even if we are looking at a .02% failure rate or less, the people who own these cameas did not seem to be using them in an overtly abusive way. Telling a user that "shooting vertically on a tripod was misuse of the camera and they would charge me $700+ to fix it." is simply ridiculous. Now if a user dropped the tripod while the camera was attached to it, that might be a different story.

[rosuna]

I like the M8 baseplate concept, but I also prefer how the baseplate is first hung (before you turn the lever) in film models.

 

Maybe a reinforced corner (in the interior side) and a lever a bit displaced will be enough in future models for assuring more resistance.

 

Anyway, there are alternative designs, like this moving door in the Sigma DP1:

 

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/images/sigmadp1_battery2.jpg

 

.

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What do you mean?

 

I think what he meant is you've got to expect that a camera such as an M8 would not even have this small level of failures. And this could be reduced to zero failures with a different design. I am not sure what level of failure is acceptable. It is hard to know how many cameras are placed onto tripods and what stresses they are subjected to. Perhaps many M8s will fail when subjected to the stresses that the broken cameras went through.

 

So if you mount every M8 camera onto a tripod in the vertical position with a Nocilux lens on it, how much stress should it be able to withstand before breakage? What would be "normal" stress and what would constitute "excessive" stress? According to the posted response from Leica, the camera is being misused simply by mounting it in the vertical position! That can't be correct or Leica would be under an obligation to warn against doing so as it is not reasonable for a photographer to anticipate any liklihood of any camera failing when mounted this way.

 

Every photographer that I know who works on buildings or shoots aerials has to be very careful about securing gear. Last year, one photographer I know dropped a 70-200 lens from very high up on a building when it slipped from his camera bag as he was rushing. He felt terrible and not because of the cost of the destroyed lens. Fortunately, it didn't hit anyone. He could have damaged his reputation if clients thought he had been careless.

 

Here is an interesting article about Peter B. Kaplan, perhaps the foremost photographer working high up using poles and remote cameras. (He held a 16' pole from a helicopter while shooting the Statue of Liberty.)

 

NikonNet

 

Quote from article: He's never worried about falling. What he worries about is something else falling, something that would hit someone below. He once that in his nightmares he saw broken poles and tumbling cameras. While no cameras or lenses have been lost, a few poles have broken—but not broken off. In one instance he heard a snap and pulled the pole back in. Seeing nothing, he went back to work. "Then it started to rain and we had to cancel the shoot," Peter says. "When my assistant was pulling the pole apart we saw the crack where the extension fit over the main pole, right where the bolts go through." After that experience he began to regularly replace poles. "I can't take the chance of them breaking on stress points I don't see."

[rob_x2004]

So if you mount every M8 camera onto a tripod in the vertical position with a Nocilux lens on it, how much stress should it be able to withstand before breakage?

 

The body has already failed from the repeated torquing of doing up the baseplate (and maybe the occasional knock) on the unsupported offcentre lug on a magnesium alloy casing. (Are we drugs?) How do you even know some metallurgical defect wasnt picked up in manufacturing making it more susceptible? Anyway it jsut shows itself when you hang a heavy load, like your bigger lens mounted vertically. Whoever approved the lazy design drawings was on drugs that day.

[AlanG]

The body has already failed from the repeated torquing of doing up the baseplate on the unsupported offcentre lug on a magnesium alloy casing. (Are we drugs?) How do you even know some metallurgial wasnt defect picked up in manufacturing making it more succeptible? Anyway it jsut shows itself when you hang a heavy load, like your bigger lens mounted vertically. Whoever approved the drawings was on drugs that day.

 

 

You are probably correct that the part is already cracked before failure is apparent. But we won't know how common this is unless every camera is mounted on a tripod and subjected to the same stress. I certainly don't disagree that this is a poor design.

[rob_x2004]

I am ony surprised there havent been more reports. I thought a heap of them would have gone by now. Maybe there arent a lot getting rough treatment. Anything revolving round tripods and sockets should be brutally over engineered, and you would hope for some progressive mode of failure, like the camera sagging off the socket.

 

Ps...Anyway its none of my business telling Leica how to build stuff. They do what they do and you either live with it or lump it. Fair enough to have an opinion on how they treat their customers and who they blame for failures though. Why isnt hte thread titled camera body shell failure? Base plate seems undamaged to me.

[PeterP]

Never really gave the baseplate much thought , but after some scrutiny it does seem to be under engineered .

[jrc]

Looking at my camera, it seems to me that there might be a relatively simple fix for cameras that are not yet broken -- the little flange on the shell that makes up the attachment point barely goes by the seam in the camera shell, and the one that was shown broken was sheered off right at the seam. If that flange were simply run further around the shell, and attached all the way, it seems to me that the attachment would be much more solid. There appears to be room to do this.

 

Might it be made an optional fix for people who would like to make sure nothing breaks?

 

I use a Leica grip on my camera and just bouncing it a little, it seems to me that this would also torque the attachment to some degree. Would the engineers present suggest going back to the original baseplate?

 

JC

[marknorton]

Problem is, if you want the base plate to fit tightly, it has to press back on something, in this case the flange in the casting with a brass plate to "lubricate" the action. Apply twisting action on the base plate through the tripod mount and you increase pressure on the flange leading to failure if there's a flaw in the casting. Good that the company which makes M8 castings doesn't do a sideline in 777 wing roots...

 

What's bad about this (IMHO) is not so much the failure itself but Leica's ignorant, knee jerk reaction.

[zlatkob]

The baseplate didn't fail, but the baseplate is still to blame. Putting a tripod mount on a removable baseplate is simply a bad idea. It's a little like jacking up your car to replace the tire and attaching the jack to the car's door instead of the car's frame.

[stunsworth]

Putting a tripod mount on a removable baseplate is simply a bad idea.

 

A bad idea that's been used on M cameras for over 50 years.

[rob_x2004]

A bad idea that's been used on M cameras for over 50 years.

 

That is not correct. No other M has the baseplate cammed to the shell.

 

The baseplate is a brilliant idea. Shame it doesnt have an O ring seal to make the body watertight. Redesign:D

[stunsworth]

The post I responded to said that using a removable base/tripod mount was a bad idea in itself, no reference to a particular model. Leica have been using this arrangement since the very earliest cameras, not just Ms.

[jaapv]

It is certainly not the first time, nor probably the last time that an underengineered part has slipped by. For instance the lens mount on the R4 through R7 series was too weak for the purpose. Any heavy lens for instance the 280/2.8 apo would bend it, unless the camera was carried either by the lens or with the lens pointing downwards. Leica service used to have a special tool to straighten it. That could be done three times before the bodyshell cracked. But at no point would Leica call that user error. That aspect is indeed new...

[stunsworth]

But at no point would Leica call that user error. That aspect is indeed new...

 

That's why I'm interested in what the person at Leica actually said. It's of course inconceivable that using a camera on a tripod could be seen as user error.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[LUF Admin]

I just contacted Leica in Solms in order to get an official statement about this topic.

 

I'll post it as soon as I get an answer.

 

Best regards

Andreas

 

That's why I'm interested in what the person at Leica actually said. It's of course inconceivable that using a camera on a tripod could be seen as user error.