Are we beta testers?

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Apparently, Erwin Puts des story, briefly, described Leica owners as beta testers (credit Jeff S for this). Similarly,na recently closed thread was started by a disgruntled SL owner who felt (understandably) disappointed that his new $7,500 camera malfunctioned.

 

Are we too fauning and accepting of Leica's at times indifferent approach to quality control and product development?

 

At risk of sounding like a fanboy, Leica is a small company and to my mind does incredibly well (if at times a little reluctantly - M8 IR and LCD problems, M9 sensor). I have probably sent more cameras and lenses to Leica than most, but Leica has generally behaved very well, giving me loaners, repairing and replacing things without demurral.

 

Where the SL is concerned, this camera has taken some years to develop and I suspect there was pressure to release it. Jono and others had given the camera extensive testing. When I got mine, it did what it said on the box, with some features to follow. We've already had one very helpful upgrade to the firmware and I'm sure the remaining bugs will be fixed before too long.

 

I guess the question is, how would other manufacturers behave? My perception is that Sony wouldn't release a camera like the SL in the first place, and confronted with the same issues as the SL, they'd just release a new model (Sony A7r a case in point).

[ramarren]

I have the Olympus E-M1, similarly ordered prior to its release in 2013. Several bugs shipped in the initial firmware. Olympus, like Leica, has steadily released firmware updates to both solve the bugs and enhance the camera. They take a long term view of their top of the line camera, as I believe Leica do as well. 

 

When I read rants and raves by people who expect everything to be perfect just because they spent a lot of money, I pass over them. Even the most expensive machines are still just machines, susceptible to all of the vagaries of defects and design errors.

 

Leica does very well, in general, and overall supports their products long after others have dropped and gone on to the next thing. 

[Advertisement]

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

[@McLeica]

Well, all manufacturers have tolerances. Forums generally emphasise the horror stories.

 

Go figure 

Edited March 19, 2016 by Rapierwitman

[CheshireCat]

Olympus, like Leica, has steadily released firmware updates to both solve the bugs and enhance the camera. They take a long term view of their top of the line camera, as I believe Leica do as well. 

 

Don't know about Olympus, but the "steadily" word certainly does not apply to Leica.

 

And about beta testers, we are actually reverse beta testers, because actual beta testers get paid to deal with bugs.

[Jeff S]

Erwin explained (as I recall before it was deleted) that Leica, unlike in the past, now rushes products to market (I think he said a year ahead) without the same attention to detail.  I've used Leica products since the 1980s, with very few problems.  But I intentionally skipped the M8, waiting to see how Leica handled the digital transition, and got the M8.2 as my first digital camera (eventually 2 of them)...no problems (avoiding so far the LCD issue).

 

I again skipped the M9, recognizing that a new full frame sensor in roughly the same body might cause issues.....and we initially got cracked sensors, red edge, color issues, buffer issues, SD card compatibility issues, etc....all of which eventually got addressed....until the ultimate sensor corrosion issues.  So I waited for the M240....but not too fast....so I missed the strap lug problems. [i'm not an early adopter for any complex machinery....cars, computers, appliances, etc....just me.] The camera has performed flawlessly for me....not for everyone....but I thought the M was a big step forward in build quality for a digital M.

 

My big concerns about Leica QC these days relate primarily to the S system.  I realize that forum reports likely represent a small portion of users, but a couple of recent threads are truly scary.  More than a few people....working photographers and loyal Leica customers....have experienced multiple problems.  I already cited this example...  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/249551-33-failure-rate-with-leica-s-system/?p=2994119    The paradox here is that Leica didn't seem to rush any lenses to market....to the contrary, one could argue that they took inordinately long.....but there are other separate threads on problems with certain lenses, which Leica recognizes.  It's the first time I've decided not to buy a Leica product because of reliability fears, even after waiting a few years to let the dust settle.  And in that time, depreciation has been monstrous (yet even discounted S's remain very expensive).

 

Leica generally fixes what's wrong....but not always consistently at the same or no charge, or at the same speed.....and rarely publicly acknowledges a serious issue until the forum has beat it to death (witness LCD issues, corrosion issues).  At the prices charged, they get no extra credit for doing what should be done.  Firmware fixes are often a different story....Leica lags companies like Fuji, IMO, when it comes to quick and frequent updates as needed.  As an aside, Fuji also does a better job communicating future lens plans to customers.

 

I can't speak for other digital cameras.  Since the 70's, besides Leica, I've owned cameras in formats from 35 to 8x10, and brands including Leica (M and R), Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Mamiya, Pentax, Hasselblad, and several others......all film....and hardly any problems.  

 

All I know is that Erwin's comments were consistent with comments from some others here on the forum.....reasonable folks, not ones out to troll.  How this compares to others I don't know...and not sure that matters....at the prices charged, Leica should lead the pack on QC, and when the inevitable problem creeps in, lead again in service turnaround.....and on communication to customers.  Still a ways to go IMO.  

 

Jeff

Edited March 20, 2016 by Jeff S

[lct]

[...] I guess the question is, how would other manufacturers behave? My perception is that Sony wouldn't release a camera like the SL in the first place, and confronted with the same issues as the SL, they'd just release a new model (Sony A7r a case in point).

 

Sony would't have released a bulky EVIL since they have a DSLR the same size as the SL more or less. I don't know what teething problems they initially had, if any, but i haven't got the least issue with my A7s mod it i must say.

[Guest VVJ]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sony, Fuji and Leica IMO all seem to be doing the same thing, ie. rushing new and incomplete systems to the market and creating as much hype around them as possible...

 

My opinion about this has changed quite a bit compared to 3-4 years ago.  I am no longer unconditionally stepping in as I did before.

 

With regards to the Leica SL I will most likely buy one if that 50mm lens is a killer lens but it could also be that I wait till the second generation with hopefully more maturity, more lenses and already promised features like adapters and tethering readily available.

[IkarusJohn]

The A7r was a shocker - the AF was terrible on mine, and shutter shock hopeless. Fixed by the A7r2, apparently. 

[Guest VVJ]

For me it was the Fuji X-T1, light leaks (which were fixed for free by Fuji) and the mushy buttons (which were never fixed, bye Fuji).

[edwardkaraa]

All digital shooters are beta testers

Edited March 20, 2016 by edwardkaraa

[thighslapper]

Leica has too wide a portfolio of cameras for what is in reality a very small company compared to it's rivals. 

 

Even with 3yr product cycles and maybe 6 months of pre-production testing you would need a lot of staff and/or beta testers to trial every combination of camera/menu setting/lens/accessory to make sure there were no problems. The flash issues are clearly evidence of this .... and the fact that firmware updates take forever shows just how few staff Leica must have tasked to these issues ....... and probably on a rotational basis like they do with lens production. 

 

To be honest, I suppose it is a surprise that the SL has so few apparent issues ...... and certainly nothing major that would have you feel that you are holding an expensive lemon. Much less to grumble about than the M9 and M240 when they appeared. 

[pop]

.... actual beta testers get paid to deal with bugs.

Where did you pick that up? Beta testers do not "deal with" bugs, they report them. Beta testers are not usually paid anything at all.

[steppenw0lf]

Have you ever been beta tester for software ?

If you had, you would never even remotely consider the SL a product in the beta phase. The SL is almost error free in daily usage.

Did your camera ever block and needed a restart ? No, usually you can work without problems.

A few features are missing - the most obvious is tethering. And the flash support is also let's cal it "limited" with manual lenses (R and M).

Some profiles for R-lenses are faulty and need correction.

 

But all this has nothing to do with beta testing.

[Peter H]

This is the downside of operating Leica's ultra-premium pricing policy in the way they do.

 

It wouldn't be terribly difficult to improve pre-release quality control and beta testing but it comes at a cost, and having pushed their pricing to the limits of what the market ( us lot) will bear in relation to what we get in return, there isn't room to recover those costs. So they don't. At least I assume this to be the case. Otherwise why don't they simply ensure that the products work better on release and charge a bit more for them?

 

Premium pricing combined with thin margins is ultimately a dangerous game in a high- tech business because one or the other is constantly under threat. But there is a way to improve things.

 

I've said before that Leica could reinforce its premium pricing strategy by developing a more open relationship with its customers. Be more honest about future plans, about acknowledging problems.

 

Develop an authentic and meaningful relationship with your customers who by and large seem to be an unusually loyal, supportive and sympathetic group who generally behave with considerable tolerance and enthusiasm for the company. Put some time, thought and money into it and don't treat it as a marketing campaign.

 

I believe that even more than the number of mega pixels on the next sensor, and the new body variants it offers, this is where there's the most mileage for Leica to exchange even more top level value with its customers.

Edited March 20, 2016 by Peter H

[CheshireCat]

Where did you pick that up? Beta testers do not "deal with" bugs, they report them. Beta testers are not usually paid anything at all.

 

To "deal with" has a quite generic meaning, and does not specifically mean "fix".

 

Don't know in Switzerland, but here in the US Beta Testers are well paid:

http://www.indeed.com/salary/q-Beta-Tester-l-United-States.html

As a matter of fact, also Video Game Testers get paid to play... and report bugs.

 

So I propose that everyone who reports a bug to Leica gets paid with a lens of choice

Edited March 20, 2016 by CheshireCat

[lct]

[...] here in the US Beta Testers are well paid [...]

 

It's just poor Europe here. You have to own (or use) the gear already if you want to be a beta tester and you will receive nothing but warms thanks from Leica. No way to sue the testers then... Too bad for us poor lawyers .

[Guest]

I have the Olympus E-M1, similarly ordered prior to its release in 2013. Several bugs shipped in the initial firmware. Olympus, like Leica, has steadily released firmware updates to both solve the bugs and enhance the camera. They take a long term view of their top of the line camera, as I believe Leica do as well. 

 

When I read rants and raves by people who expect everything to be perfect just because they spent a lot of money, I pass over them. Even the most expensive machines are still just machines, susceptible to all of the vagaries of defects and design errors.

 

Leica does very well, in general, and overall supports their products long after others have dropped and gone on to the next thing. 

 

I would add to that, that the more electronics goes into things, the more so-called "bugs" have to be ironed out in firmware. Bugs being human errors or omissions nothing more and nothing less. The internet is full or rants and raves, it is THE place to go. This is why I read reviews with more than a pinch of salt. The best review is you yourself in front of what you want to buy, trying it out for yourself.

[pgk]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Release a new product too quickly and there will be bugs - real world bugs too - the ones the beta testers failed to spot in time. If you don't release new products you are losing ground and not innovative and fast enough to market new products. Just look at the number of posts about 'what's next' and 'problems with new products'. Its a no win for many manufacturers. Personally I am amazed at what a smallish company like Leica can achieve but of course this does come at a price, financial and technical.

[349A]

Having owned and still owning most of these- M8, M9, M9M, SL, S 006 and countless lenses, accessories etc. I have had only two failures, neither was related to "beta testing." My M9M came out of the box with a misaligned sensor and not long after the power switch became very hard to turn. Both fixed by Leica NJ, no questions, quickly and friendly. The power switch issue was likely caused by the sensor alignmnent repair. Bad QC? Maybe or maybe shipping issues. They took care of it, no problem, it happens. Especially in a hand made product. Regardless, I have zero feelings of anything but happiness with my purchases.

 

Bugs in computer based products are normal. Every company has firmware updates that fix issues and/or improve products. The most important thing when purchasing equipment like Leica- the after sales support. I have no complaints. 

 

Do I wish Leica gave better roadmaps or communication- sure. However, being in retail/distribution, this is a double edged sword. I have often eaten my words after informing my clients about an upcoming product. Its much better not to build expectations- your sales of existing products come to a screeching halt and you get pestered constantly for delivery dates and information, requests for product changes etc. Leica mostly take the right course here IMHO. 

 

I'd guess Puts removed the quote because he recognized it wasn't accurate. But now we can read it daily here on this forum. Over and over.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Ingo]

... Forums generally emphasise the horror stories.

 

...

Agree.

 

It is totally clear, that a new camera system (same with all new software using products) needs a little time to

1) support all 'meaningful' use cases (whereas 'meaningful' can be discussed controversial)

2) be 'understood' by all customers (whereas 'understood' means "I know how the product is intended to be used" and "where are the limits of this special system").

Nowhere we will find 'perfect' software from the first version.

Of course real bugs needs to be fixed asap.

 

I'm using the SL since three month now and always got the pictures I wanted without any limitations. (Sometimes I had to use workarounds).

 

But I'm also quite sure that we will see improvements in future which enhances the capabilities of the cam.

 

(Amen)

Edited March 20, 2016 by Ingo