Jump to content

Bye, Leica. It was fun.


Agent M10

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As someone doing underwater photography I know that small things can have a huge influence on sealing. a small piece of dirt, a hair, some damage to the seeling, some force on the lens from the side and many other things can lead to leaking.

The different question is: is it actually a user fault, or a fault of the camera. Hard to say.

 

my under water housing includes a pressure metering and a lamp which switchs form green to red if pressure gets wrong. This shows even a underwater housing good for 100m depths is not safe from leaking.

 

If you are sure that you didnt do anything wrong, if you are sure if anything was clean, connected the right way and not to high forces when you had the camera under the arm, than I would go into further discussion with Leica to find a compromise.

I had my S and my SL near to wet in rain and snow and they did fine. (I am getting a litlle more carefull in the future )

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leave your innuendos at the door. Say what you mean or say nothing.

 

 

Maybe - my thoughts are similar, though. Selling the equipment creates more loss. I would talk to Leica Wetzlar directly and explain my point in a non confrontative manner. I would be surprised if there is no room for a compromise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused about David Farkas comments about the Canon and Nikon users not being able to use their cameras in the rain. 

 

Assuming they were the weather sealed models, I sit behind a couple of press photographers at the rugby in all weathers. Both use Canon. They seem to keep working even in heavy downpours. 

 

I think you were taking in by an advertorial. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you were taking in by an advertorial. 

Leica's own website says "The camera and S-Lenses are extremely ruggedly built and sealed against environmental influences like dust and rain. " Sounds convincing to me even without advertorial.

 

Edit: the above quote is from prerelease. The current statement is "All other components of the new Leica S are extremely robust and, thanks to the numerous seals, are perfectly protected against environmental influences, such as dust and moisture." i.e. "moisture" not "rain". It uses the same terminology for the SL (which I have used in heavy rain).

Edited by LocalHero1953
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here's an article, including photos, of an event where Stephan Schulz of Leica participates in a demonstration of the SL's weather sealing by having a bottle of water dumped directly onto the body. Obviously, it's not an S007, but my understanding has been that the sealing is of a similar standard.

 

http://leicarumors.com/2015/10/30/the-new-leica-sl-camera-and-lenses-are-weather-sealed.aspx/

 

It's worth noting that Mr. Schulz is the product manager for Leica professional equipment and he is mentioned by name in David Farkas' Iceland article as having supplied the S007.

 

I am not a lawyer, but I think I recall the OP of this thread mentioning that he is, in fact, a lawyer. I have no idea what the reality of consumer protection laws are in the USA but I certainly feel like a line was crossed. If there were cause to pursue Leica over false or misleading claims then I would say why not try to depose Mr. Schulz?

Edited by Joshua Lowe
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not an S, but I've shot my SL in rain and heavy snow (with native lenses) and it hasn't sneezed even once.

 

Did they breakdown the costs or was it a flat out statement asking to pay the money? This is strange because every service order clearly states the nature of repairs to be conducted and the final due amount incl. taxes - if you do NOT wish to proceed with the repairs, you simply pay the service fee incurred for the cost estimation and walk away. But you still have the complete breakdown of repairs and associated costs.

 

Do you by any chance know who in Wetzlar was contacted for this issue?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused about David Farkas comments about the Canon and Nikon users not being able to use their cameras in the rain. 

 

Assuming they were the weather sealed models, I sit behind a couple of press photographers at the rugby in all weathers. Both use Canon. They seem to keep working even in heavy downpours. 

 

I think you were taking in by an advertorial. 

I concur. My 1DX and assorted L lenses get indecently wet quite often.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the S-system is the poor and stiff customer service, and the somewhat poor effort Leica makes for customer satisfaction. I have been a S-shooter from the first day and I'm very happy happy so far (I think I should be at more than 7k frames now without any problem), except when I had a problem during updating the firmware and the zoom got broken. Awful customer experience which could be fixed only with someone I know at Leica. They really have to do something now for the S-customers!

 

(as Nikon was mentioned, I can report even worse experiences).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel your pain. The biggest let down for me would have been no pictures, due to a dysfunctional camera on a major trip - and a heavy one at that, with all the lenses, turning into a deadweight that I need to carry and look after for the rest of the trip. No insurance can cover that. And, given the cost and weight involved, it is hard to carry a spare body with the S system. This is the main reason my S007 has been confined to the studio and "around the house" and staying home whenever I travel far and carry stuff on my back.  Two Fuji bodies, 3-4 lenses, that's it for me these days. One can follow a similar route with Canon/Nikon - pack a top end body and a cheaper old/entry level one as back up. And yes, I too would expect someone who's spent tens of thousands on a Leica S system to be able to bear a $4k repair bill. In fact, my rule is to buy insurance only against risks that I can't afford to cover myself...and you do sound like someone who can cover a $4k repair bill. And whether you abandon Leica because of this episode - that is up to you to compare the costs and the consequences, financial and emotional. Good thing is that you came back unharmed and can plan another trip :). As for Leica, well if I were them, I'd offer you a free discount voucher for your next purchase, at least, as a consolation and reward for loyalty. 

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

Maybe - my thoughts are similar, though. Selling the equipment creates more loss. I would talk to Leica Wetzlar directly and explain my point in a non confrontative manner. I would be surprised if there is no room for a compromise.

 

I could not agree more.....

 

Albert  :(  :(  :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

To the OP. Feel your pain.

 

I have had no problems with my S2, even on a sail boat during a two month cruise, even having the camera pottering on my little tender. You can imagine the salt water is everywhere and tropical rains are a regular occurrence and I usually rinse the camera and wipe it. I usually have my S24 on the camera which has a broken AF almost 100 percent of the time, as a sort of a body cap and I rinsed the camera with the lens on several occasions. I understand that I have no insurance nor guarantees for my old S2. No insurance company will insure a camera on a sailboat offshore.

 

Coming back to your Porsche analogy, the price you have paid for the repairs is the price of tyre you can burn over a racing weekend. If you are not enjoying your camera or a Porsche anymore, get rid of it and enjoy your life again.

IMHO.

Edited by ynp
Link to post
Share on other sites

 No insurance company will insure a camera on a sailboat offshore.

 

 

 

Insurance policies differ by location, by company and by individual circumstance.  My US policy will indeed cover this or any other situation not covered by warranty, even if due to my own negligence, whether damage, loss or theft.

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurance policies differ by location, by company and by individual circumstance. My US policy will indeed cover this or any other situation not covered by warranty, even if due to my own negligence, whether damage, loss or theft.

 

Jeff

I am Russian in a boat registered in France , traveling in South Eastern Asia , hope to get a hop to South Africa next season, if my health permits. Unfortunately, no camera insurance for a poor Russian boy . Lol , the boat is insured, at least. Edited by ynp
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica's own website says "The camera and S-Lenses are extremely ruggedly built and sealed against environmental influences like dust and rain. " Sounds convincing to me even without advertorial.

 

Edit: the above quote is from prerelease. The current statement is "All other components of the new Leica S are extremely robust and, thanks to the numerous seals, are perfectly protected against environmental influences, such as dust and moisture." i.e. "moisture" not "rain". It uses the same terminology for the SL (which I have used in heavy rain).

 

 

The current catalog:

 

"Just like all other components of the S-System, the lenses are perfectly protected against environmental influences such as dust and moisture. The focusing ring can even be used in the rain and it is impossible for water to enter the lens barrel through either the bayonet mount or around the front lens. The exposed glass surfaces of all S-Lenses also feature our water and dirt-repellent AquaDura coating, which prevents adhesion of drops of water and particles of dirt and lets them just roll off the glass. The Leica S is therefore always ready for action, even in rainy and dusty environments."

Link to post
Share on other sites

To OP: You need to be persistent and insist that Leica fix it free of cost. A few years back, I was sold a "pre-owned with Leica warranty and CLA"  S2 by an authorized Leica dealer - it turned out to be a VERY damaged piece. Initially Leica blamed me for it, but luckily I had pictures to prove them wrong.

 

Long story short it left a bad taste and they only fixed it for "free" after I told them that I will escalate to the state's consumer protection bureau and other agencies. When cornered with proof, the dealer blamed it on Leica:

 

"The problem here is, apparently Leica USA was not telling me the correct facts when they said this camera was checked out. So now, this camera, that was purchased from Leica with signs of impact, is now in Germany, and Germany thinks you are the one that damaged it! Which of course is not the case."

 

 

Email trail below....warning: long text but may be an interesting read.

 

************************

 

Betreff: Help Requested with Certified Pre-Owned Leica S2.

 

To: Customer Care, Leica Camera.

 

  I am writing in response to an estimate for repair provided for my Leica S2.

 

  This camera was purchased from Leica Store xxxx on June xxxx 2013 (Sales Invoice is attached). It was taken to Leica New Jersey on June-28-2013 as I noticed spots on images and auto-focus did not seem accurate to me. 

 

  Per Leica's assessment, the camera shows "impact damage and heavy traces of use" amongst other defects (please see attachment). I have taken  about 200 shots with it and it has always been kept in a padded bag. I don't understand how this assessment of "impact damage and heavy traces of use" can be made given that it has been in my possession for less than 3 weeks and not exposed to harsh conditions, nor dropped, carried in airplane luggage or misused in any other way.

 

  Further, this camera was purchased as a Leica Certified Pre-Owned equipment and I would have assumed that Leica performs a thorough quality check before anything is sold as pre-owned.

 

  As a owner of several S and M lenses and M9, this is very disappointing and I am hoping that Leica will rectify the situation at the soonest keeping in mind the points I noted above.

 

Best Regards,

 

**************************************************************

.........Response:............................

 

From: xxx@leica-camera.com

CC: zzz@leicastoreggggg.comyyyy@leicacamerausa.com
Subject: AW: Help Requested with Certified Pre-Owned Leica S2.
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 11:50:32 +0000

Dear Mr. xxxx,

 

Thank you for your email. We sincerely regret that you are not satisfied with our assessment regarding the condition of your S2.

Your camera was in Germany for inspection and repair in 2011 and delivered to our agency in the US for resale as a pre-owned camera with slight to moderate signs of use.

 

We inspected the S2 when it was send in with your lenses in July of this year. The technician found the following damage:

 

Top plate broken

Hot shoe deformed

Dirt between field lens and penta prism

Sensor de-calibrated

Front shell, rear shell and main body broken

Mirror point de-calibrated

Shielding plate deformed

 

Please understand that we can only determine the faults not how they occurred. Some images of the damage are attached (More in second email).

Damage due to impact are not covered by the warranty.

 

 

Kind regards

 

xxxxx

 

Leica Camera AG

 

**************

My response:

 

Betreff: RE: AW: Help Requested with Certified Pre-Owned Leica S2.

 

Hello xxxxx,

 

  Thank you very much for your prompt response. With the pictures you have provided, it is clear that I was sold a defective camera by Leica Store xxxxx. I understand Leica Germany's position that they cannot determine the impact. Please allow me a few days to discuss this with the dealer.

 

For Leica's Germany's record, attached is the condition of the camera as described by the dealer when it was sold to me. I have pasted some extracts below:

 

"This Leica S2 is in very good condition. There is one mark on the top plate as seen in the photos, and some wear around the rubber on the bottom of the camera. All functions work perfectly.

 

This camera was recently given a complete service by Leica Camera Germany, including a full cleaning, thorough calibration, and check of all functions."

 

Given that your records show that it was serviced back in 2011, the dealer's claim that "this camera was recently given a complete service by Leica Camera Germany" is not true. Can  I request you to provide me a contact at Leica Germany who is responsible for your dealer network? I want to find out if Leica dealers are required to be truthful in dealings with their customers.

 

Best Regards,

 

******************

Leica:

Dear Mr. xxxxxxx,

 

I will wait for your feedback. However, as I previously mentioned, the camera was in Germany for a complete checkup in September of 2011 and was sold in the condition described by Leica Store xxxx. Our agencies and official Leica dealers are an extension of our company and are trusted and professional partners that provide excellent customer service.

 

It is not in their or our interest to sell damaged products to our customers or falsify information regarding their condition.

Please consider this as well.

 

 

 

 

Kind regards

xxxxxxxx

 

Leica Camera AG

Customer Care

Solmser Gewerbepark 8/ D-35606 Solms / Germany

www.leica-camera.com / xxxxxx@leica-camera.com 

Telephone +49(0)6442-208-189 / Fax +49(0)6442-208-339

 

***************

 

After this I spoke to the dealer and told them to pick up the cost of repair or take the camera back. See the response from the dealer, incl. the text that "Leica USA is not telling the truth":

 

Yes, I see all the emails and photos. Here’s the story. When I purchased this camera from Leica USA, as certified pre-owned, they indicated that it showed minor signs of some kind of impact, but that it had been fully checked and certified to be good to go. I said sure I'll take it, because I knew that it would be a chance to sell an S2 at a cheaper price, many people don’t mind a bit of cosmetic wear to save some money, like myself.


The problem here is, apparently Leica USA was not telling me the correct facts when they said this camera was checked out. So now, this camera, that was purchased from Leica with signs of impact, is now in Germany, and Germany thinks you are the one that damaged it! Which of course is not the case.

 

So what I've done is I'm bringing in the Leica employee who actually sold me the camera. I have written records from her indicating the original damage, so there is clear proof, along with the product photos we took of it before it was sold, that the camera had impact damage before it was ever in your possession.

 

I'm working on this now so I'll have it resolved as soon as possible. I won't stop until we make it right.

 

Best,

Edited by ravinj
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Joshua! Thanks for sharing the IG photo which is BTS from my Iceland trip.

 

I shot with S007 under heavy rain/snow/wind with no issues for 16 days there. Here is the link with more BTS photos: https://www.faran.gallery/blog/2016/7/15/the-harsh-winter-of-iceland

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...