M9 Longevity

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, I found his message on this forum on the matter;

 

"As promised yesterday by JJ, please let me state our position about the serviceability of the M8 and M8.2 Display.

 

First of all, we are very sorry, that some of you encountered issues with your cameras. It remains our aim to find the very best solutions to satisfy you. Please let me give you some more information and details on the display issue.

 

The cameras with a display problem stay operational, image quality and the main functions are not affected.

The effect only occurs on a single production lot of displays, both built into M8 and M8.2.

The serial number of the camera doesn’t give information about the lot of the display.

 

The lot in question was pulled out of service stock as soon as we have recognized the issue.

 

Meanwhile the manufacturer of the LCD displays had stopped production, in general these parts have a very short life cycle and Leica did not have a possibility for additional production. As the display and the rest of the electronics are linked very much together, it was not possible to create a repair solution up to our quality requirements.

 

The display of the M9/M9-P is a different display and is sourced from another manufacturer and is therefore not affected. For the M9 as for all our products, we are taking measures that we are able to service the camera for a period of at least ten years after production will stop. In the case that (especially electronic-) parts are no longer available, we will offer an upgrade program. As you know, we have quite a history of being able to service our products for a period much longer than that!

 

The upgrade program will work with both a M9 or M9-P, with a slightly different premium. Please contact your local Leica Customer Care for details should you have concerns with your M8/ M8.2 display.

 

Best regards from Solms,

 

Stefan Daniel, Director Product Management"

[wattsy]

I would have emphasised this part of Stephen Daniel's assurance:

 

"In the case that (especially electronic-) parts are no longer available, we will offer an upgrade program."

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Advertisement]

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

[!Nomad64]

I sold my M9 after 5 years of use--I now own an M and an MM. I received about $2,800 for my M9--I sold it through a dealer rather than direct because I didn't want to deal with e-bay buyers. To put it bluntly, if the sensor cracks a week after the dealer sells it to someone else, it isn't my problem and I don't have to deal with a legitimately angry buyer. That is worth the haircut to me.

 

The mistake I think most photographers make when they buy what they view as an expensive camera is to assume that this is the last camera they will every buy. This may have been somewhat true with film, but it isn't with digital. The way I looked at my M9 (and continue to look at my other cameras) is that I essentially paid a $1,000 a year to use the camera. That really isn't that much if you are serious about your photography and you take into account your other recurring costs like paper, ink, software, and all there other stuff.

 

Given the changes in technology and the nature of digital parts, I believe it is a mistake to assume you are going to get more than 5 to 8 years of use out of a camera--5 is probably the more realistic number. And with a used camera, 3 may be the better number. On the other hand, I have viewed the acquisition of the lenses as a much longer-term investment, particularly if they are optimized for digital, although people obviously have outstanding experiences with older Leica lenses.

 

I do note that I started with a pre-digital 90mm summicron manufactured in Canada. It has not held its used value, so I am even suspect about lenses from a resale standpoint, but I don't plan to resell the lenses.

 

The other thing to consider: If you do need to replace the sensor or a major component, are you going to want to put $1,000 or $1,500 (or whatever the amount) into a camera that is then worth $2,000 or $3,000, particularly if there are now used Ms on the market? The facts are simple: A new M will eventually come along. There will be a waiting list. People will complain, but in a year or so, the market will be flooded with old Ms as the new Ms arrive and the price of a used M will drop like a rock.

 

Actually there are several ways to deal with that exactly as it happens with cars. One is the way as stated by sanyasi, namely upgrading every time that there's a new model, selling one's own at a fair price and adding the difference to get a new one. This way one pays a "photography tax" over the span of the years between a model and its successor and is always up to date.

 

Another one is buying a camera, keeping it as long as it works or satisfies the owner, then buying a new one, say two or three upgrades later and getting some little cash or none at all for the older one. At the end the cost should be more or less the same as with the other solution, but with less purchases in between.

 

Otherwise there's an intermediate way, namely always buying second hand stuff as new models become available and selling the older ones. It's like the first one, but involves less disbursement against the fact of always having older technology than the current one if one can live with that.

This is the way I personally adopted.

 

So James is very right as he states that he doesn't think there are no other associated costs to digital photography than just a camera.

If one purchases a film camera and a bunch of lenses, the other involved costs will be films, chemicals or 3rd party development and CLA.

Therefore there's an initial investment and then a progressively increasing amount to pay to make it work.

 

With digital cameras one initially pays for the camera and the lenses, then from time to time he'll have to pay for a new camera and a new computer.

 

Put on a graphic, the first one is a climbing straight line starting well above zero, the second one is a series of horizontal straight lines bumping higher as time goes by, like stairs.

Depending on one's mileage, the two lines might get across each other several times.

 

Regarding the lenses regrettably it's always a guessing game, depending from models and changes in taste. There are some that keep very well their value, other that don't. Generally Leica lenses tend to keep their value and eventually to increase it over time.

The Summilux 75/1.4 sold in little numbers when it was available and was cheap as no one wanted it. Now it's very sought after and the prices have skyrocketed at crazy levels..

When there was only the M8 the 135/3.4 was not very much requested and it was relatively cheap to buy.

As soon as the M9 was launched, it immediately regained popularity and the prices rose a bit.

The 50/1.4 ASPH was the most requested lens at the time and as Leica couldn't keep the pace, used ones were sold at slightly less than new and PreAsph ones were also much requested. Now it's normalized again.

As of now the 90/2 AASPH rose its price because there aren't very much and it sells for much higher than a few years ago.

On the opposite side, the Elmarit M 90/2.8 price has remained very stable in the last 5 years.

The MATE 28-35-50 has been discontinued and reached a cult status and it's almost impossible to find. When available it's very expensive.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

Edited May 2, 2014 by !Nomad64

[stunsworth]

This is often said, but is not true.

 

With digital one needs storage. One needs regular software updates and most likely several programs which all come with a price.

 

I can put 15+ years of photographs on a drive that costs just over £100. Say £250 including the backup. That's under £20 for each year. I was spending more than that every week just on film once upon a time.

[!Nomad64]

Steve,

 

with all due respect a drive won't last you 15 years. I have to replace mine every 2 to 3 years. I also think that you'll have to change your computer more than once over a 15 years span.

I understand that if theoretically one decides to stay with the same digital camera for 15 years then the computer he uses to develop its files can stay the same for 15 years, but I seriously doubt that this actually happens in the real world.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[sanyasi]

On the opposite side, the Elmarit M 90/2.8 price has remained very stable in the last 5 years.

The MATE 28-35-50 has been discontinued and reached a cult status and it's almost impossible to find. When available it's very expensive.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

 

I am curious why the 28-35-50 was discontinued and has not been reinstated. With all the calls for zoom lenses, you would think this would be a big seller. I do understand that this is not a true zoom.

 

Any thoughts or speculation?

[sblitz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

ME is the M9 so the camera is still being produced for now. Eventually it will become useless which is sad to think about but so too have been all those computers we have used during the past 30 years or so. Digital cameras are computers with a lens attached

[Jeff S]

Buy insurance.

 

The OP lives in the US, and there are various companies that offer comprehensive insurance in the event of a loss. Policies vary, but mine would cover any instance such that a camera became unrepairable.

 

Jeff

[!Nomad64]

I am curious why the 28-35-50 was discontinued and has not been reinstated. With all the calls for zoom lenses, you would think this would be a big seller. I do understand that this is not a true zoom.

 

Any thoughts or speculation?

 

Leica's official excuse was that it required some particular glass which couldn't be regularly supplied or something like that.

You understand well, this is not a true zoom. It's rather a variable focal lens, the difference being that whilst a zoom can change its focal length in continuity within the excursion ends, the MATE can be set only at 28, 35 or 50mm. The reason is pretty simple: any Leica M's viewfinder has fixed frames for given focal lengths. Anything intermediate couldn't be possibly viewed appropriately.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[Jeff S]

You understand well, this is not a true zoom. It's rather a variable focal lens, the difference being that whilst a zoom can change its focal length in continuity within the excursion ends, the MATE can be set only at 28, 35 or 50mm. The reason is pretty simple: any Leica M's viewfinder has fixed frames for given focal lengths. Anything intermediate couldn't be possibly viewed appropriately.

 

But the WATE (Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21) is still supplied.

 

Jeff

[jdlaing]

Leica's official excuse was that it required some particular glass which couldn't be regularly supplied or something like that.

You understand well, this is not a true zoom. It's rather a variable focal lens, the difference being that whilst a zoom can change its focal length in continuity within the excursion ends, the MATE can be set only at 28, 35 or 50mm. The reason is pretty simple: any Leica M's viewfinder has fixed frames for given focal lengths. Anything intermediate couldn't be possibly viewed appropriately.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

 

And when used with the M-240 and EVF or LCD it acts as a true zoom with framing and focus at all points in between.

[bocaburger]

When the M9 came along with full frame and no mandatory need for IR filters, I considered it worth the cost of admission to upgrade to the M9. I have no such quibbles with the M9 and feel no pressing compulsion to upgrade to the M240. I intend using the M9 until it breaks and is impossible or uneconomical to repair, and then I'll deal with how to replace it. Otherwise I'm not giving it a thought, just continuing to enjoy this fine camera. I'm more concerned with my own longevity, not going to stress myself over a camera.

[Jarrito]

Thank you everyone for your responses. I found the majority of them quite encouraging. I am extremely excited to begin my adventures in Leica M digital.

[stunsworth]

Steve,

 

with all due respect a drive won't last you 15 years. I have to replace mine every 2 to 3 years. I also think that you'll have to change your computer more than once over a 15 years span.

 

 

I have a 1 TB drive that I've been using since 2003. Other drives have failed yes, but it's still far cheaper than the £30+ I was spending each week on film once upon a time.

 

As for the computer, that's replaced every 4 years or so, and it's not just used for image processing. I think I've had 3 computers since the late 90s.

 

Which ever way I look at it digital is far cheaper for me than film, and that's before I start to take the hours spent developing and scanning into account.

[sanyasi]

Thank you everyone for your responses. I found the majority of them quite encouraging. I am extremely excited to begin my adventures in Leica M digital.

 

Based on your original post, I assume you went with the used M9, or did you go with the M240?

 

Whichever, you will get great results. Have fun.

[!Nomad64]

And when used with the M-240 and EVF or LCD it acts as a true zoom with framing and focus at all points in between.

 

With all due respect I'm not so convinced it would work like this. Have you tried that yourself?

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[!Nomad64]

But the WATE (Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21) is still supplied.

 

Jeff

 

The WATE was introduced 8 years after the MATE, one year before this latter was dismissed. As to why they stopped making the MATE, here's a dedicated thread:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/35012-why-tri-elmar-discontinued.html

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[jdlaing]

With all due respect I'm not so convinced it would work like this. Have you tried that yourself?

 

Cheers,

Bruno

 

Yes I have. Flawless.

[Jeff S]

The WATE was introduced 8 years after the MATE, one year before this latter was dismissed. As to why they stopped making the MATE, here's a dedicated thread:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/35012-why-tri-elmar-discontinued.html

 

I'm well aware. My point was that the Tri-Elmar concept is not inherently flawed, as evidenced by the WATE. And particularly as it works on the M240, as jdlaing notes.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[!Nomad64]

Yes I have. Flawless.

 

Thank you very much, I learned something new and also appreciated once more Leica's design allowing for older lenses being fully compatible with new cameras they weren't originally designed to work with. In this case even revealing an unexpected feature.

 

Cheers,

Bruno