Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Leica's response is very welcome - especially as refunds will be given. Leica Camera should also consider publishing any revised / recommended sensor cleaning procedures asap.

 

I hope Leica Camera receives recompense from their sensor supplier for all resultant aggravation.

 

dunk

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"If the imaging quality of your camera gives cause for complaint in this respect, we recommend that you send it directly to Leica Customer Care or the authorized Customer Care department of your country’s Leica distributor. As longer waiting times may otherwise occur, the camera should only be sent to Customer Care after prior arrangement."

 

Hopefully this means that Leica will now replace sensors on an individual pre-arranged appointment basis rather than having to send in cameras on mass which are then held in an ever lengthening queue. Let's hope the permanent fix is not too far off.

Edited by KeithL
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To borrow from Churchill's comment on us Americans:

 

"You can always count on Leica to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else."

 

But seriously - the past is past, and I applaud Leica for stepping up to the plate. I'm happy to help them defray the costs with future purchases. Thank you, Stefan.

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the small survey thread I started on this forum, the responses so far are 8 yes to 12 no.

 

Meaningless survey for many reasons. For one, we do not know how many of the responders know what delamination looks like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like every M9 and MM is going to start over again with a brand new sensor... which means I'll have to put up with even more years :o reading about the legendary CCD sensor! This version just won't go quietly into the night. Oh, and price of a used M9 and MM just went through the roof. A legend is born. :p

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be possible that Leica allowed for this contingency via an excess of loss product liability insurance covering sensor failure(s) … after all it's not the first time that they have experienced failures from third party sensors. If so, the cost of remedial action would be recoverable within the policy limits.

 

dunk

Edited by dkpeterborough
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be possible that Leica allowed for this contingency via an excess of loss product liability insurance covering sensor failure(s) … after all it's not the first time that they have experienced failures from third party sensors. If so, the cost of remedial action would be recoverable within the policy limits.

 

dunk

 

If so, could it be they could afford such an insurance, with the right wording in the contracts, because they're taking correct decisions for some time now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if this has been answered, I've not seen it in my searches:

Is there any evidence that wet-cleaning causes delamination marks?

My M-E has no white marks. Dark dust marks are always taken care of with a blower, very effectively. Is that why I have no delamination? Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

If so, could it be they could afford such an insurance, with the right wording in the contracts, because they're taking correct decisions for some time now?

 

Prudent company managers/directors should assess risks and insure accordingly i.e. for loss layers they cannot reasonably cover themselves. Provided they have an insurable interest in a risk they can obtain cover … and insurance policies are worded to suit.

 

dunk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...