Confirming the temperature problem.

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Georg,

 

Maybe the time is approaching to stop being patient and forgiving of the many and grievous failures of Leica on the M240 project (lugs not being fixed, failing cameras, slow firmware updates, temperature problems, missing accessories, etc etc). I do wonder if many of us should be writing angry and strongly worded letters to the CEO, so that some action might be taken, rather than just anodyne and uninformative statements being issued. I imagine the dealers are as fed up as many of us owners are.

 

Wilson

 

Well put although I do take exception to "anodyne and uninformative statements". I do try to inform myself to the best of my abilities even when Leica says nothing to its customers or worse denies the existence of a real problem (over heating).

 

I must say I sent a blistering email to the H. Kaufmann, H. Karbe, the US Leica President and the Manager of CS Solms about the APO50 some 2 months ago. I did get action for me and hopefully for others. At least now they are sorting out the APO50 problem over at QC instead of the CS from what I understand. Good move in my opinion.

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

Leica would repeat what they told us during the beta testing of the current firmware update i guess i.e. that the issue is related to a temperature depending mode being activated above 40°C and that they will improve this behavior in the next firmware update, because it requires intensive testing and they didn't want to delay the public release of the current FU anymore.

[Rick]

Leica would repeat what they told us during the beta testing of the current firmware update i guess i.e. that the issue is related to a temperature depending mode being activated above 40°C and that they will improve this behavior in the next firmware update, because it requires intensive testing and they didn't want to delay the public release of the current FU anymore.

 

Yes, I agree. I don't remember Leica ever denied the problem of the overheating. In the beta test group it was reported in August to Leica and they responded shortly after that in public with the statement about the 40 degree mode etc... I really believe Leica had no idea of the problem until then. Once they discovered it from the beta testers in August they stated that they solved it and stated it will be in the next firmware. I assume It was too late to get it into the first firmware update everyone received.

 

As far as slow releases of firmware updates for the M... the camera was rolling out slowly in April (a handful got copies in mid March) and reports of AWB and color issues were brewing here in May.

 

The beta testers received the first beta at the end of July. It was mainly designed to address the AWB and a few other issues. That is about 2-3 months after the earliest of us had our cameras and started complaining and experimenting with dual-illuminance profiles . The vast majority of customers had no camera yet, and could only watch the posts on the forums. I think Leica acted pretty quickly to get out the first beta.

 

The second beta was released to the beta testers in late August. We had a chance to test it for about six weeks before it was released to the public. Comments were taken by Leica about the AWB and many other issues. Some of the other issues were addressed in the firmware release, some are yet to come.

 

This seems to me to be a fairly hastened action by Leica in their response to the color issues. I am glad that they took the time to let us test it, and then make a correction from our comments in the second beta... which we tested, and Leica finally released it to the public. This process led to a solid firmware and a satisfying correction to the AWB and color issues

 

It may be fair to complain about the initial problems, but it appears to me that Leica is more able to get firmware out faster now that it is done in-house.

 

Lastly, I encourage users to write Leica and let them know what is going on. I am certain now they do not actually read this forum closely at all. I would not assume that just because we all know about something discussed here for months means Leica has got the message. I do know for certain that when constructive observations are brought to the attention of the right people at Leica, they check them out.

[pico]

How will firmware solve solve the 40C issue? Tell me! 40C is a well known limit with other makers. Will you accept an intentional shutdown when the limit is reached? I would say you will because that is exactly how the M (240) behaves now - albeit with less grace than you appreciate.

[pieterpronk]

Yeah I guess one could not expect Leica to fix problems faster IF their first customers are to be their beta test team, and it takes months to even get the camera's to enough beta-testers/customers. But one then has to question if releasing a 6300 euro camera and then expect their first customers to do the beta testing is a valid strategy.

 

Personally I don't think confusing customers and beta-testers is a fair strategy with any normally priced camera, nor with a Leica M. Besides there is a difference between using regular customers and using professional testers. With all due respect obviously, but why are we paying 6300 euro when Leica isn't even paying their own testers? Is this some expensive open source project?

Also, didn't testing begin more than a year ago? Why didn't that testers team find this problem or the color problem???! Or did that team just consist of Jono, Ming and Sean, who were more involved for the marketing and reviews it seems.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Rick]

How will firmware solve solve the 40C issue? Tell me! 40C is a well known limit with other makers. Will you accept an intentional shutdown when the limit is reached? I would say you will because that is exactly how the M (240) behaves now - albeit with less grace than you appreciate.

 

Pico, neither you nor I know what is causing the M to shut the EVF down. The camera itself doesn't shut down. As far as my usage goes and others, the camera runs fine in hot environments as long as the EVF is not on.

 

The issue of the 40 degree sensor is tied to the EVF. I have no idea what software logic kicks in at 40 degrees when the EVF is running. For all we know it is an error in the code. Or maybe, the sensor is set to turn off the EVF as the temp approaches 40 degrees. Or maybe the internal temp with the EVF peeks just above 40 degrees and Leica engineers are confident that the EVF mode can be raised just one degree and that solves 95% of the shut downs. Maybe, this is all bullshit. This whole thread is bullshit, as far as this type speculation and arm chair engineering goes.

 

We are just going to have to wait and see what can be done with firmware in the update and if there are consequences.

 

Other than trying to present what I know about the issue factually... I don't care about any of this. I'm not a Leica apologist either. I don't even care if Leica's firmware change causes the camera to overheat and brick. I already have my information on this issue. The camera runs hotter with the EVF sucking electrons through the circuit boards on the M. I am going to continue to just turn the EVF off when not in use and turn the camera off when I am anticipating I will not be shooting. This solves the overheating issue for me and saves my battery at the same time. I am going to shoot like this no matter what the new firmware does. For me, I don't use the EVF or the LV that much and even less in hot environments. I already own the camera so it is not an issue I have to justify to myself... others will have to decide for themselves how you are going to use the camera. For example, someone shooting all day long in a studio with LV on may not be not be happy.

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yeah I guess one could not expect Leica to fix problems faster IF their first customers are to be their beta test team, and it takes months to even get the camera's to enough beta-testers/customers. But one then has to question if releasing a 6300 euro camera and then expect their first customers to do the beta testing is a valid strategy.

 

Personally I don't think confusing customers and beta-testers is a fair strategy with any normally priced camera, nor with a Leica M. Besides there is a difference between using regular customers and using professional testers. With all due respect obviously, but why are we paying 6300 euro when Leica isn't even paying their own testers? Is this some expensive open source project?

Also, didn't testing begin more than a year ago? Why didn't that testers team find this problem or the color problem???! Or did that team just consist of Jono, Ming and Sean, who were more involved for the marketing and reviews it seems.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Peter, I suspect the answer to your questions can be found in the center of these issues you present in your post. They are what they are.

 

I try and enjoy the good things, help to change the problems, and have the maturity to to live with what I can't control.

[algrove]

Rick

You know my view on this matter as I have stated it ad nauseam.

 

However, Leica had better find an improved way to address customer's concerns properly or they will loose customers respect and the respect of those who expect Leica to treat them properly and not dismiss customer concerns with " Never heard of that happening before now". Perhaps CS has outlived some of its usefulness.

 

I guess over the years we have all put up with malfunctioning Leica product so that they think we will just take it even if the product does not function as advertised. I can tell you I will not take it any longer.

 

Some of the problems are our fault for not demanding change when change is needed and the other part of the problem is that Leica thinks they have a superior product even if it does not work properly. Just because it's made in Germany no longer guarantees it is well made and over engineered. I know that is a fallacy now.

 

Why should we have to send emails to top brass if they have an office that should handle customer complaints and mechanical problems? Things need changing where CS should take all matters of concern to another office immediately instead of dismissing it as a one of a kind problem.

[Rick]

Rick

You know my view on this matter as I have stated it ad nauseam.

 

However, Leica had better find an improved way to address customer's concerns properly or they will loose customers respect and the respect of those who expect Leica to treat them properly and not dismiss customer concerns with " Never heard of that happening before now". Perhaps CS has outlived some of its usefulness.

 

I've tried to convey many times here that I don't think that when you were visiting Leica in Germany in early August that they were aware of the problem. The beta testing was taking place about that time you were there and I don't see how the person you were talking to would know about what was going on in the beta program. I understand that you feel they lied to you, but I'm not sure that fits with the time frame.

 

I guess over the years we have all put up with malfunctioning Leica product so that they think we will just take it even if the product does not function as advertised. I can tell you I will not take it any longer.

 

Again, I think you are personalizing the problem. I don't believe Leica operates from the position that they feel their customers "will just take it." The products are what they are. I really believe Leica is trying to produce excellent products... and it most areas they are.

 

Some of the problems are our fault for not demanding change when change is needed and the other part of the problem is that Leica thinks they have a superior product even if it does not work properly. Just because it's made in Germany no longer guarantees it is well made and over engineered. I know that is a fallacy now.

 

Why should we have to send emails to top brass if they have an office that should handle customer complaints and mechanical problems? Things need changing where CS should take all matters of concern to another office immediately instead of dismissing it as a one of a kind problem.

 

I'm a little confused. In one paragraph you you say the fault is ours for not demanding change and in the last paragraph you ask why we should have to send emails to those in higher positions where they might be able to do something in their department to fix something that is a problem.

 

I do get your drift, though. I guess I'm just different as to how I react to a thing that doesn't work for me. I'm also not a professional and dependent on the camera. It is really just shits and grins for me. Like you said, we know each other's view on this. I just use something for what it is, maybe get a little frustrated, I never write letters. I just stop buying stuff if it doesn't work right. But, so far, for me, I just haven't had any real issues with the M that would make me anything but overall delighted with it. (Realize in the beta I called the EVF a "dud" and told Leica they needed to "get their act together" on the start-up time). But, overall, at the end of the day, I like this camera more than anything else out there, for me.

 

I'm hopeful Leica is moving forward.

 

Rick

[jaapv]

Agree 100% with Rick. As the OP of this thread my constructive intention was to highlight the problem.

Overall I find the camera an excellent and stable tool that -apart from this hiccup- performed flawlessly in rather harsh conditions.

[barjohn]

I would think Leica marketing and engineering should be reading this forum. It is their best opportunity to learn what their customers are saying, both good and bad and to become aware of problems that they might need to address. It seems like marketing 101 and basic engineering to close the loop with your customers and potential customers.

 

If you contrast this company to the Hublot company that builds high end watches you will immediately see the difference in customer care. Whereas no one from Leica ever comments or engages with customers on this forum, on the WatchTalk forum, on the Hublot section, the CEO (Claude Biver) of the company is constantly engaged in responding to customers, offering personalized extended warranty certificates and welcoming new buyers to the club.

 

Leica really needs to up its game. Perhaps it is just a coincidence, though I doubt it, but since the introduction of the Sony A7 & A7r, M 240 cameras suddenly are available everywhere. Maybe its production suddenly caught up with demand or maybe demand dropped to below production. Time will answer the question, but new prospective buyers coming to this site and reading all of the threads with M240 problems is very likely to decide that the Sony cameras at a third of the price are a much better proposition.

 

If Leica conducted environmental chamber testing, I don't see how they could have missed this overheating problem whether it was due to software or hardware. We routinely conduct environmental testing as well as below surface to high altitude testing, humidity testing and more to ensure reliability of our electronics. With the reliability data we collect we can very accurately predict whether a given missile will be successful for a specific mission. We can also predict how frequently it should be returned for inspection and testing to keep a high reliability. While our software is very specialized, there are commercial software packages that can perform the same functions using similar methods and technologies. We often combine 3-axis vibration testing to really stress a system including interconnects, solder joints, mechanical mounts, etc.

 

While, Leica may not want to perform all of the tests we perform, it wold make sense to perform the most strenuous test during the design phase and lesser tests on random samples pulled from production lots to ensure that quality is being maintained. The inspector sign off has to be more than a quick visual inspection and sticking a card in the box.

[Guest malland]

...If you contrast this company to the Hublot company that builds high end watches you will immediately see the difference in customer care. Whereas no one from Leica ever comments or engages with customers on this forum, on the WatchTalk forum, on the Hublot section, the CEO (Claude Biver) of the company is constantly engaged in responding to customers, offering personalized extended warranty certificates and welcoming new buyers to the club...

John, not sure that it would be wise for the Leica CEO to have people engage on his behalf in LUF — I assume he would be wise and busy enough not to do it himself — for the simple reason that Leica market research should go way beyond LUF to get at the pulse of the market. Of course this issue is much more complicated than this if you remember that the Leitz Company (as I think it was called then) almost went bankrupt by developing and issuing the M5, which had all the things they "thought" that their customers wanted — missing the essential aspect that the market really wanted the M3/M2 shape. Indeed, that whole fiasco was typical of a production-oriented company suddenly thought it was being market-oriented, having slept through Nikon/Canon/Asahi Pentax taking over the bulk of the high-end 35 mm camera market with SLRs.

 

The whole issue of market orientation is much more complicated than this, however, if you consider the Steve Jobs approach of giving what the market "really wants" as opposed to what the market "thinks it wants." The obvious difference being, as I sure you know from your experience, that market research in high tech consumer markets is very difficult because the market often has no idea what it thinks it really wants because it doesn't know what's possible — and the brilliance of Steve Jobs was to sense where to "lead" the market to. And I don't mean that Leica should follow the Apple approach because the enormous difference in the size and R&D funds of the two companies obviates most comparisons.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[Rick]

John, not sure that it would be wise for the Leica CEO to have people engage on his behalf in LUF — I assume he would be wise and busy enough not to do it himself — for the simple reason that Leica market research should go way beyond LUF to get at the pulse of the market. Of course this issue is much more complicated than this if you remember that the Leitz Company (as I think it was called then) almost went bankrupt by developing and issuing the M5, which had all the things they "thought" that their customers wanted — missing the essential aspect that the market really wanted the M3/M2 shape. Indeed, that whole fiasco was typical of a production-oriented company suddenly thought it was being market-oriented, having slept through Nikon/Canon/Asahi Pentax taking over the bulk of the high-end 35 mm camera market with SLRs.

 

The whole issue of market orientation is much more complicated than this, however, if you consider the Steve Jobs approach of giving what the market "really wants" as opposed to what the market "thinks it wants." The obvious difference being, as I sure you know from your experience, that market research in high tech consumer markets is very difficult because the market often has no idea what it thinks it really wants because it doesn't know what's possible — and the brilliance of Steve Jobs was to sense where to "lead" the market to. And I don't mean that Leica should follow the Apple approach because the enormous difference in the size and R&D funds of the two companies obviates most comparisons.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

 

Mitch - This is possibly the most resonant thing for me that I have read from you in a while. What you are getting at is that place where the MM came from. Not many companies have made an MM type product. Apple has done it. Leica has done it with the MM. Maybe, they will get there with a M. But, I agree that they won't make it there making a me-too product or making a product by customer consensus. - Rick

[Guest malland]

Rick, thanks. I really like your example of the MM! Really gets at the heart of the issue, that the brilliance in corporate strategy is not among the low-hanging fruit.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

[Rick]

Hey Mitch, what can I say, sometimes you are just really right.

[barjohn]

Mitch,

 

On the aspects of marketing we are in full agreement. It requires vision as well as knowing how to interpret customer feedback. Steve, used many focus groups to test his vision which was the innovation of taking known information and fusing it with the unknown to create something new but familiar. However, Steve made mistakes too. For example he was convinced that customers would not want and iPad smaller than the original size and he resisted bringing out a smaller version long enough to allow his competitors to get a foothold in that market. He ignored the requests to build a mini iPad for a long time...too long. Once market share is lost it is hard to get it back.

 

I think that Leica is a master in the world of optics and mechanical optics (i.e. MF). Whether that expertise extends into the electronics of today's AF is not so apparent and when it comes to circuit design and software, they are clearly still in the learning stages. I am guessing that they are using software development methods that were used in the 80's and 90's and have not mastered the skills of rapid development needed today. Methods such as those used in Agile Development would hit cultural boundaries with German culture that works so well in the physical arena. Many years ago I was a VP of Marketing for a computer company that owned a German subsidiary and on my visits to our plants in Germany I would see the differences between our cultural approaches to hardware and software development.

 

Leica mistakes long cycles to produce firmware upgrades with higher quality. That is a false illusion. Longer cycles means that the original coding job was poorly done so it is taking longer to fix the problems. A short cycle means that the quality of the code was so good it didn't take long to find and fix the few bugs that were remaining or missed. One quickly should develop a suite of tests that can be automated to test all of the possible scenarios (don't take that literally) and that can be done with a computer faster than any human testing. Where the human excels is in figuring out what caused the problem and creating a solution.

 

Developing and improving quality processes would also go a long way toward improving the product. 3-D shake and bake testing would have found many of the problems like cracked sensors, over heating, lock-ups, etc. To cut their costs they could do more rigorous parts acceptance testing as it is better to catch the problem prior to suing a component in manufacturing. Margins testing would go a long way to discover interface issues like the difficulties with working with some SD cards. Lug stress testing well beyond rated capacity would have discovered the problem with lose lugs and improved calibration standards would find the problems with lenses and bodies that don't focus properly together because the tolerances could be improved (made tighter on the manufacturing side).

[Guest Gilgamesh]

Over the next few weeks I will be able to tell you how the M performs in seriously cold weather as I have a project centred around photographing life in the coldest capital city on the planet.

 

Gloves will be required as being a metal body, I don't like leaving skin behind.

[Guest malland]

John, interesting. I wonder, though, how all these issues might be related to the "Made in Germany" cross that they've chosen to bear. I understand that Jobs built a factory to make Macs in California, but then moved all manufacturing to Shanghai, if I understand correctly.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Tristes Tropiques [WIP]

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[k-hawinkler]

John, interesting. I wonder, though, how all these issues might be related to the "Made in Germany" cross that they've chosen to bear. I understand that Jobs built a factory to make Macs in California, but then moved all manufacturing to Shanghai, if I understand correctly.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Tristes Tropiques [WIP]

 

 

Well, the new MacPro is being manufactured in the US.

[dwbell]

At some point, and I think I crossed it at my first realisation of "here we go again!" with my M240 on my recent France trip, it's no longer ok to say "try your best" to a company whom I'm paying many thousands over the odds for a small full frame camera. And yes Jaap, the money does make a difference.

 

It's ok to "do your best" when you're my 5 year old daughter. We put her primitive pictures on the fridge, we support her, we encourage her and praise her. She's not selling her wares professionally on a competitive market for an obscene mark up, however. At that point, it is no longer ok.

 

Seriously, this is the camera that was supposed to put the (still not working right) M9 behind us. It does in many ways, but yet again, it doesn't in so many ways. What have they learnt? Can I see/feel evidence of that? Or am I going to again be a high paying beta tester for 3 years?

 

I'm just disappointed at the continued obvious incompetence. I expected better, maybe I shouldn't have.

 

I stand by my long held belief. Experts in optics, and mechanical design / manufacture. Way, way behind in electronics, software, coding and shamefully, laughably behind as a company in connecting with their customers.

 

Fantastic images from my trip, the 75 cron is doing better / different things on the M240 which it didn't on the M9 (maybe I can just focus it better?). So final output is in no way my concern. The ball ache to get there vs the price I'm asked to pay is.