m9 sensor misalignment

[regular]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all,

 

I have recently bought a Noctilux ASPH (under warranty), and decided to have it perfectly calibrated and matched with my M9 (out of warranty). So both were sent to Leica Solms.

 

Now Leica's representative tells me that the M9's CCD sensor is misaligned and some repair should be charged. When I ask this person if the misalignment is due to some incorrect tolerance during the M9 assembly, he answers that it is most certainly due to some chock or bad usage like "skiing with the camera" (!).

 

Have you met some similar issues if "sensor misalignment" before ? Was it due to unsifficient tolerance during assembly, bad QC, or some chock (how bad) ?

Do you know if a sensor can really move that easily ?

 

The only case I have found was due to bad QC checking :

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/260171-some-thoughts-leica-quality-leica-nj.html

 

Thanks & regards,

David

[marknorton]

I think if the camera had had a sufficiently severe shock to move the sensor, there would be external signs of impact damage. If the outside of the camera is pristine, you should challenge Leica to explain how the sensor has moved in normal handling.

 

The sensor is bonded to an aluminium plate which is mounted at three points to the front die-casting. By placing shims under each mounting point, the sensor can be made exactly parallel to the lens mounting surface and the correct distance from it.

 

Back in the days before the M9 was announced, I made a mockup of a full frame sensor to see if one could be fitted in the camera without changing the body. I thought it wasn't possible but it turned out Leica somehow squeezed it in. To do that meant a new sensor carrier plate which was surprisingly thin in places, so it may be the plate can get distorted by shock.

 

Here's a link... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/95748-leica-m9-ff-mock-up.html#post1004125

 

Keep in mind that the rectangular hole is FF sized, 24*36 mm; in practice, an even larger hole is required for the sensor to be mounted which will make the borders even thinner. Here is a picture of the M9 sensor carrier taken at Photokina last year:

 

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!

Edited February 7, 2013 by marknorton

[Advertisement]

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

[salomons]

Have had this problem as well.

I bought a used M9 as an upgrade of my M8 and couldn't get he focus right. It drove me wild.

Brought it to Leica in Switzerland, where they have their own repair facility and they fixed it. Supposedly the sensor was badly misaligned.

Now all good.

Good luck

[hoppyman]

David I suggest that you look at what the estimate actually says first regarding what work would be charged for and the total cost. You may possibly only get very basic information but you could then contact Customer Service and ask for amplification if you like.

 

If the camera is to be checked and adjusted the whole camera is checked and adjusted, not a single possible issue. The whole camera is then guaranteed for 12 months.

 

There are separate processes for the alignment of the sensor with respect to the lens mount and the adjustment of the rangefinder too. My guess is that rangefinders can go out of adjustment more easily than sensor alignments.

 

I don't know at what point Leica Camera introduced new alignment testing equipment and adjusting procedures (or standards?). It came from experience with the M8 I think.

 

Whatever is the case, I suggest that you look at exactly what will be done and for how much and weigh the benefits you should get.

[FPB]

I sent my M9 with all lenses I had aquired to Solms for alignment after test images showed the 35 lux and 90 cron to have focus issues. Camera and lenses all within warranty, approx. 1000 exposures.

The QC noted the M9 needs sensor alignment. I'm absolutely sure that the camera never got a shock that might have caused a sensor shift in the body. I'm pretty sure this must have been misaligned from the beginning. CS at Solms got it right without any charges.

 

Bill

[jev]

Had the same thing sent M9 and Nocti for calibration

Sensor realligned for free

 

May be yours is very much out of allignment, however i believe you rangefinder will be out of alignment first, if camera was subject to impact, may be this argument will convince them to fix it for free

[keenr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been following this thread and other related threads. I too have been told in early Jan/13 that my sensor needs realignment.

 

 

My M9 camera was sent to Leica USA for service in April, 2011 (shortly after buying new) to resolve paint that had rubbed off and to fix observed focusing irregularity with both a 35 cron and 50 lux.

 

Leica USA returned the camera and lenses to me with partial improvement in focusing (35 better, 50 lux not) and lettering on the m9 that was now ledgible. I acquired 2 additoinal lenses since then and have been frustrated with focusing...almost resigned to the point that i felt it was me and not the camera or lenses. Nevertheless, i just sent my camera in again (Jan 02, 2013) with all 4 lenses, complaining about the same focusing issues.

 

Now, I'm informed it's a sensor alignment problem (peliminary assessment). Since i'm weeks out of warranty, the estimated cost to repair is $450.. Kinda frutrates me that focusing all along could've been related to a sensor alignment issue. I say this as I have white gloved this m9. It has barely 5000 actutations.

 

Partial good news, I've since been told Leica USA will discount the repair by 1/2.

 

Interesting thing about this procedure, I am informed that to perform the sensor realignment, the skin will have to be replaced (replacing the discontinued vulcanite skin).

 

Just curious but could it be that the focuing problem is a factory issue and only now being addressed with NEW sensor alignment testing? I'm told as well the sensor aligment test was performed the first time my body was sent in, despite no indication of skin replacement back then.

 

I like my Leica, but feel they are somewhat fragile.

 

...

[lm_user]

I needed a sensor re-alignment as part of a pixel re-map on an m8. I assumed that the sensor had to be removed from the camera for mapping and therefore alignment was necessary upon re-installation. My wallet is now lighter

[marknorton]

Sensor alignment is certainly critical. I've seen shims as thin as 0.01mm which suggests Leica are setting the sensor to +/- 0.005mm or 8 - 10 times the wavelength of light.

 

The sensor has to be critically aligned to the lens mount - parallel to and exactly the correct distance from it - and any distortion of the casting through damage or ageing can upset the alignment. I'm no metallurgist but I expect the alloy from which the body is made is chosen for its dimensional stability.

 

Interesting too to think of thermal expansion. If it was made from pure aluminium, the critical lens mount - sensor distance would change by 0.03mm as the camera was warmed from 0 to 40 degrees C, so I expect the choice of casting material also requires a low coefficient of thermal expansion, probably an order of magnitude better than aluminium.

[giordano]

Interesting too to think of thermal expansion. If it was made from pure aluminium, the critical lens mount - sensor distance would change by 0.03mm as the camera was warmed from 0 to 40 degrees C, so I expect the choice of casting material also requires a low coefficient of thermal expansion, probably an order of magnitude better than aluminium.

 

Magnesium and its alloys typically have a higher linear CTE than aluminium and its alloys (c. 26×10^-6 per kelvin at room temperature vs c. 22×10^-6 per kelvin). But here's a paper that reports a dramatically lower (1.24×10^-6 per kelvin) CTE from a magnesium alloy loaded with unidirectional graphite fibres.