k-hawinkler Posted December 11, 2014 Share #961 Posted December 11, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I was going through my dealer. But hopefully NJ should have been brought up to speed on this issue. Just give them a call and ask, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 Hi k-hawinkler, Take a look here Strange white spots on M9 sensor?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
M9reno Posted December 12, 2014 Share #962 Posted December 12, 2014 In my case, documented by photographs of suspected corrosion on pages 22 and 32 of this thread, Leica CS has this morning written back to say that they have tested the camera and found NO problems. They are cleaning my sensor and sending back the camera free of charge. Obviously I was given no upgrade option, which is what I had requested. I am puzzled by this outcome. But I look forward to seeing the 'clean' sensor. It does raise the question of how Leica's goodwill scheme will operate going forward. All seems to depend on how they define a "problem": i.e. how advanced any corrosion problems have to be before they agree to act. Aside from the fact that I believed my camera to be affected, in my opinion the vulnerability of the sensor to humidity is a problem in and of itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 12, 2014 Share #963 Posted December 12, 2014 Well, they do look carefully. My M9 was fine, the Monochrom did have delamination. One will be returned cleaned, the other awaits a new sensor. Total cost zero and free shipping both ways. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 12, 2014 Share #964 Posted December 12, 2014 It does raise the question of how Leica's goodwill scheme will operate going forward. All seems to depend on how they define a "problem": i.e. how advanced any corrosion problems have to be before they agree to act. I suppose it may be like stuck pixels on an LCD screen whereby the manufacturer will allow a certain number of anomalies to be considered "within spec". IMO it would not be unreasonable for Leica to prioritise the worst cases initially and/or take the view that one or two minor delamination defects (which might be as easily cloned out as ordinary dust spots) do not yet warrant a sensor replacement. This obviously risks upsetting a number of customers and is one of the reasons why I think the new policy is a sticking plaster at best and, in the absence of a permanent fix (which I really doubt is forthcoming), the replacement policy is just diluting/delaying the bad feeling and reputation damage that the current problem is going to cause. The M9 is, sadly, quite quickly going to be seen as a toxic product and a product only worth buying if it is unreasonably cheap. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 12, 2014 Share #965 Posted December 12, 2014 One will be returned cleaned, the other awaits a new sensor. I'll be interested to see if you get your's back sooner than mine (which has been at Wetzlar for over a month now). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 12, 2014 Share #966 Posted December 12, 2014 The M9 is, sadly, quite quickly going to be seen as a toxic product and a product only worth buying if it is unreasonably cheap. I'm happy to pay an unreasonably low price for another;).Pm me with offers:D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted December 12, 2014 Share #967 Posted December 12, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I suppose it may be like stuck pixels on an LCD screen whereby the manufacturer will allow a certain number of anomalies to be considered "within spec". That's what I'm afraid of. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted December 12, 2014 Share #968 Posted December 12, 2014 I suppose it may be like stuck pixels on an LCD screen whereby the manufacturer will allow a certain number of anomalies to be considered "within spec". IMO it would not be unreasonable for Leica to prioritise the worst cases initially and/or take the view that one or two minor delamination defects (which might be as easily cloned out as ordinary dust spots) do not yet warrant a sensor replacement. This obviously risks upsetting a number of customers and is one of the reasons why I think the new policy is a sticking plaster at best and, in the absence of a permanent fix (which I really doubt is forthcoming), the replacement policy is just diluting/delaying the bad feeling and reputation damage that the current problem is going to cause. The M9 is, sadly, quite quickly going to be seen as a toxic product and a product only worth buying if it is unreasonably cheap. Stefan Daniel has stated that Leica is working on a 'permanent technical solution'. A suitable new cover glass with improved coating(s) could transform the existing sensor and provide the desired longevity. According to posts elsewhere there appear to several possible alternative sensor glasses worthy of investigation/consideration. However, their different spectral transmission characteristics necessitate camera firmware upgrades … thus any permanent solution will not happen overnight. dunk 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 12, 2014 Share #969 Posted December 12, 2014 I'm happy to pay an unreasonably low price for another;).Pm me with offers:D. So would I but the more interesting question is whether you would pay the recent going rate (£2000-2500) for one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted December 12, 2014 Share #970 Posted December 12, 2014 That's what I'm afraid of. Well this problem develops quite quickly once it starts, unlike the stuck pixels. I don't see much benefit in delaying the inevitable. Why open and service the camera twice? From another perspective, I think it is wise to wait until there are 10-15 spots before sending the camera in. This way they can't pretend not to see it 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 12, 2014 Share #971 Posted December 12, 2014 Stefan Daniel has stated that Leica is working on a 'permanent technical solution'. A suitable new cover glass with improved coating(s) could transform the existing sensor and provide the desired longevity. According to posts elsewhere there appear to several possible alternative sensor glasses worthy of investigation/consideration. However, their different spectral transmission characteristics necessitate camera firmware upgrades … thus any permanent solution will not happen overnight. Yes, I know all this. I'm sure Leica have good intentions but I doubt that the permanent fix will be forthcoming. The focus of the company has long moved on to the M240 platform and the relationship with the CMOS sensor supplier and, even with the best will in the world, the development team at Leica will hardly relish revisiting the M9 and its troublesome CCD sensor. Leica may well decide in quick time that it'll be cheaper, medium to longer term, to simply transition as many M9 customers to the M240 platform ASAP. Generous goodwill offers may start to magically appear (especially as there seems to be a glut of the M240 product at dealers and, presumably, in the pipeline). The M240 is now £3999 at some authorised dealers – think of the factory cost price of this camera and the deals that Leica can afford to do. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 12, 2014 Share #972 Posted December 12, 2014 I suppose it may be like stuck pixels on an LCD screen whereby the manufacturer will allow a certain number of anomalies to be considered "within spec". IMO it would not be unreasonable for Leica to prioritise the worst cases initially and/or take the view that one or two minor delamination defects (which might be as easily cloned out as ordinary dust spots) do not yet warrant a sensor replacement. This obviously risks upsetting a number of customers and is one of the reasons why I think the new policy is a sticking plaster at best and, in the absence of a permanent fix (which I really doubt is forthcoming), the replacement policy is just diluting/delaying the bad feeling and reputation damage that the current problem is going to cause. The M9 is, sadly, quite quickly going to be seen as a toxic product and a product only worth buying if it is unreasonably cheap. This reads like a number of unwarranted suppositions trying vainly to masquerade as facts. You have absolutely no idea and certainly no proof of Leica's policy in this matter. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 12, 2014 Share #973 Posted December 12, 2014 This reads like a number of unwarranted suppositions trying vainly to masquerade as facts. Hardly, I'm simply offering my opinion. Interesting that you of all people would accuse me of making "unwarranted suppositions trying vainly to masquerade as facts". Talk about pots and kettles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 12, 2014 Share #974 Posted December 12, 2014 So would I but the more interesting question is whether you would pay the recent going rate (£2000-2500) for one? No, but only because I have a (virtually unused) M8-2 as a back up which still produces perfectly usable images. I'm not put off from buying one though. M9 depreciation is still less than most high priced dSLRs (which is why I've just bought - I needed one - a dSLR for a fraction of its original price). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 12, 2014 Share #975 Posted December 12, 2014 You have absolutely no idea and certainly no proof of Leica's policy in this matter. We shall see how it pans out. If Leica can come up with a satisfactory permanent fix and put in place a process that replaces affected sensors in a reasonable period (let's say up to a month) I will happily put up my hand and say well done Leica. Until then, I won't be holding my breath. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 12, 2014 Share #976 Posted December 12, 2014 Leica may well decide ..... that it'll be cheaper, medium to longer term, to simply transition as many M9 customers to the M240 platform ..... Its one of several solutions and may offer Leica a cost effective solution. The very related question which few are really willing to objectively address - perhaps even Leica;) or many Leica owners - is viable longevity of digital cameras. The era of mechanical reliability and associated long life is drawing to a close. [FWIW I import and sell underwater housings designed to operate in very adverse conditions (corrosive salt water, high pressure, etc.) - (and not for Leica!). The (mechanical) housings are quite capable of outlasting the electronic cameras they were/are designed for, either film or digital, in spite of where they are used. The problem is that whilst the housing will still work and can be serviced, its the failure of the cameras or uneconomic servicing/repair costs for them which limits the housing's usable life. My personal opinion is that digital cameras should be seen as a ten year investment at the very most (unfortunately in my case, along with their housings). Beyond that everything is a bonus and values are down to minimal levels]. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRIago Posted December 12, 2014 Share #977 Posted December 12, 2014 Does someone know if this can be considered corrosion? I'm just wondering. Thanks guys. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/216349-strange-white-spots-on-m9-sensor/?do=findComment&comment=2726829'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 12, 2014 Share #978 Posted December 12, 2014 Hardly, I'm simply offering my opinion. Interesting that you of all people would accuse me of making "unwarranted suppositions trying vainly to masquerade as facts". Talk about pots and kettles. An opinion about what somebody else may or may not do without any supporting information is an unwarranted supposition in my book. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted December 12, 2014 Share #979 Posted December 12, 2014 10 years is an eternity in the digital age. I would say 5-6 years at the most. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted December 12, 2014 Share #980 Posted December 12, 2014 Leica may well decide in quick time that it'll be cheaper, medium to longer term, to simply transition as many M9 customers to the M240 platform ASAP. I have replied to Andrea Frankl, enclosing crops of what I think are the corrosion spots (pp. 22, 32 of this thread), and asking them to have another look. I, too, thought CS would be super keen to transition me to the M240, even at an early sign of corrosion. Let's see what happens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now