Leica Ends Free Sensor Replacement for M9/Monochrom Bodies

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Then why not communicate transparently in the first place?

 

Can someone point me to a definitive statement from Leica about how long they were going to offer free replacement sensors prior to the latest announcement?

 

With hindsight most situations like this could have been handled better although expectations are invariably at odds with what is on offer.

[Go Figure]

Completely irrelevant!

 

... completely ?

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!

[Guest]

...than the M9 came out...

on 2x M8 + 2x M9 I spent $27 000 alone...

 

How was the exchange rate of the CA$ and the AUS$ to the US$ in 2007-2010?

Can't think of another explanation.

 

Duric the epic wars for sports agencies' budgets from Nikon to Canon and later back to Nikon, discounts of over 40% for six-digit deals were rumored. Don't understand why pay double for Leica, instead of getting a discount?

[Go Figure]

...than the M9 came out...

on 2x M8 + 2x M9 I spent $27 000 alone...

 

How was the exchange rate of the CA$ and the AUS$ to the US$ in 2007-2010?

Can't think of another explanation.

 

Duric the epic wars for sports agencies' budgets from Nikon to Canon and later back to Nikon, discounts of over 40% for six-digit deals were rumored. Don't understand why pay double for Leica, instead of getting a discount?

 

FYI:

M8 came out in 2006

M9 came out in 2009

 

also:

due to a discrepancy of release and delivery delays up to several years % negotiations were unfortunately not possible.

 

( please let me know how your 4x M10 deal works out - thx )

[pgk]

... completely ?

 

Well the last DCS model had neither anti-aliasing filter nor microlenses. I seem to remember that it was the development of microlenses which caused delays and caused Leica problems in that everyone who wanted a digital M was impatient for Leica to release one and Leica were working on the microlens array presumably with Kodak (I can't remember all the ins and outs). So equating the sensor in what was Kodak's swansong dSLR with a yet to be developed, microlens-fitted sensor in the M8 is tricky.

 

And whilst the DCS ProN still takes surprisingly good images (14MPixel, and I was using mine earlier this year) its software and interface were/are far from the best - mine is highly idiosyncratic to this day - and demanded a vast amount of user input. The basic camera wasn't really up to pro use either - the covering is sticky and falling off mine, which is now relegated to display use rather than image taking sadly. As far as I'm aware, 12 years after it was discontinued there is no longer any viable support for the ProN for most of us who have them. Many of the early dSLRs had long term problems too - the Fuji S2Pro had sensor heat/delamination hiccups apparently - Contax were an early adopter but pulled out of dSLR production entirely - and it was left to the major players - Nikon and Canon - to produce 'pro' quality cameras which had high levels of reliability.

 

Given this state of affairs I'm still somewhat surprised that Leica were prepared to overcome the obstacles they faced and successfully develop and produce an M dRF at all. And I've not been surprised that they have had problems in doing so. And they have not been alone in having hiccups with their cameras. The M8 was far from perfect but was a very good first attempt at a commercially viable M dRF, the M9 was far better but obviously wasn't perfect either. 

[Guest]

FYI:

M8 came out in 2006

M9 came out in 2009

 

also:

due to a discrepancy of release and delivery delays up to several years % negotiations were unfortunately not possible.

 

( please let me know how your 4x M10 deal works out - thx )

That's when you bought yours?

[Robert M Poole]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Anyone know how to convert an M9 to film?

[Go Figure]

The M8 was far from perfect but was a very good first attempt at a commercially viable M dRF, the M9 was far better but obviously wasn't perfect either. 

 

Epson Cosina had already proven that by 2004 

 

Leica was pressured into releasing Beta cameras ... or loose it all

 

( why do you think I called my connection in Germany to get on a M8 list

only to learn that none existed and Leica was going belly up ... pls see previous post )

 

Kodak was proud to implement NO AA filter they had done that optionally for the 760

they also were Leaders in Digital development

since the late 80s

 

Kodak was the leader in NON AA filter sensors ... Canon's AA filter was so strong  it needed 300% USM sharpening in post pro

... Nikon did not have a FF sensor ... Minolta was on the way out ...  Contax 6MP

 

>>>> Kodak was the only option to come anywhere close to  Leica glass resolution

Edited May 19, 2017 by Mark Ebert

[Guest]

Let me please understand you, Mark: you write here about your two M9 , that you bought in 2009 and used since then as a heavy-duty pro?

[pgk]

>>>> Kodak was the only option to come anywhere close to  Leica glass resolution

 

Absolutely. I have 420, 620 and ProN. The point I was trying to make is that there were more developments needed and as you point out, Leica weren't exactly awash with development money. The ProN lacked many refinements too. Its an awfully complex machine in comparison to the M8 and shows how much had changed in the 3 years between its discontinuance and the M8's launch. The M9 represents another lurch forward and whilst it too can still take superb images, its well outdated now.

[mikemgb]

 

Anyone know how to convert an M9 to film?

 

 

Put it on eBay then convert the meager amount of money received to an M2 or M3, it's probably still worth that much - until August anyway.

[Robert M Poole]

   

 

Put it on eBay then convert the meager amount of money received to an M2 or M3, it's probably still worth that much - until August anyway.

 

Luckily I got the sensor replaced earlier this year due to a line of dead pixels. Phew! 

[mikemgb]

 

Luckily I got the sensor replaced earlier this year due to a line of dead pixels. Phew! 

 

 

I'm expecting the M9 to start being valued in 2 ways soon, those with documentation showing the sensor has been replaced with a newer one, and later cameras, will retain their value. Those earlier ones and those with no documentation will take a hit in value.

Edited May 19, 2017 by mikemgb

[Go Figure]

Absolutely. I have 420, 620 and ProN. The point I was trying to make is that there were more developments needed and as you point out, Leica weren't exactly awash with development money. The ProN lacked many refinements too. Its an awfully complex machine in comparison to the M8 and shows how much had changed in the 3 years between its discontinuance and the M8's launch. The M9 represents another lurch forward and whilst it too can still take superb images, its well outdated now.

Thank you for your reply great to have found someone here who lived part of my path.

... and like me might  be baffled by the similarity of events regarding Kodak and Leica.

I know this forum has it origins in Corporate Leica - maybe someone else will come forward

and shine a light on events once the dust settles.

[Go Figure]

  

 

Those earlier ones and those with no documentation will take a hit in value.

 

"Those earlier ones "

were purchased by day one Leica supporters

and they are now the first

to get punished !?

Edited May 19, 2017 by Mark Ebert

[mikemgb]

 

 

  

 

Those earlier ones and those with no documentation will take a hit in value.

 

"Those earlier ones "

were purchased by day one Leica supporters

and they are now the first

to get punished !?

 

 

Sadly, yes, I believe that will be the case, the value of a camera that may need a €1000 repair at some point in the future is certainly going to take a hit.

[Go Figure]

   

 

Sadly, yes, I believe that will be the case, the value of a camera that may need a €1000 repair at some point in the future is certainly going to take a hit.

 

well let's see ...

how many are willing to play sacrificial lamb

[pgk]

Thank you for your reply great to have found someone here who lived part of my path.

... and like me might  be baffled by the similarity of events regarding Kodak and Leica.

I know this forum has it origins in Corporate Leica - maybe someone else will come forward

and shine a light on events once the dust settles.

 

I think that the fundamental problem here is expectations. An 8 year old design which was discontinued 5 years ago is minimally halfway through its life and in some cases more than. But Leicas last forever, or so many still think, even though a digital camera is an entirely different beast to a mechanical one. And at some point support will cease; I'd like to think at 10 years after production ended. After the indignation has died down some may start to consider the viability of a replacement sensor in an 8 year old camera from Leica's pov, though I'm not sure about this. But at some point Leica will have to withdraw support entirely. Should they continue to offer replacement sensors up until the point at which support ceases?

 

I think that whatever Leica did/does they are going to be criticised and the criticism is about a problem that they did not foresee, and about which they have now done something. I personally fully understand their position. Offering a replacement sensor, full service and full year's warranty is actually a great option, but there's a bottom line. As I own a potentially affected Leica I could be moaning and complaining myself but I'm not. I'd rather have an 8 year old camera restored to full functionality and given a full year's warranty, although I certainly don't relish the cost. On the other hand its still going to be cheaper than buying another M dRF so  if I must I will pay and carry on. And all that said, my 'affected' M9 has not developed sensor problems as yet despite being extensively used and used in conditions which might be expected to exacerbate any problems and it may never do so.

 

IMO Leica have been sitting on this problem which is/has undoubtedly cost them a lot, they've developed a solution and have dealt with many cameras for free. As all cameras are now at least 5 years old they've obviously decided its time to call it a day with respect to free replacement - though I suspect that they will be busy for the next few months as a result. They could have handled it better but if they'd delayed and gone with another time frame they would still receive criticism no doubt.

[rafikiphoto]

I have a sentimental attachment to my MM. However, if I had known that their assurance to me in Wetzlar not to worry, that the old spec sensor replacement, should it also corrode, would be replaced again without charge, was worthless I would have considered their upgrade offer to the MM2 more seriously.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Go Figure]

I have a sentimental attachment to my MM. However, if I had known that their assurance to me in Wetzlar not to worry, that the old spec sensor replacement, should it also corrode, would be replaced again without charge, was worthless I would have considered their upgrade offer to the MM2 more seriously.

 

I agree there is more too Leica then just permeating through Leica body incarnations.

 

The M8 and M9 although bulkier than the original M has a good feel and balance to it especially with modern/heavier lenses.

 

I would have hoped they did not abandon the "upgradable" ( Leica speak ) M8 but instead commit to it

as a alternative format.

( everybody makes 1.5x cameras now except Sigma but their sensor does not allow the use of short registration lenses )

 

Leica could have built a set of lenses that is high powered but still small enough

not to block the viewfinder.

Instead they opted for FF and meanwhile build elephantine lens sizes - so now you need and SL or live view and EVF etc.

to even get the full picture in the VF.

How does that integrate into Leica M Philosophy ?

 

Moreover the  M8/M9  has superior balance compared to the M240 and the M-10; especially when you switch from horizontal to vertical shooting  - not all Leica users are defaulting to  "thumbgrip and horizontal shooting only mode " in their shooting habits.

I don't feel like elaborating on the pros and cons of the different bodies - but Leica has clearly trouble to establish a genuine format there

they are still in search-mode ... the M10 now going back to film M dimensions with so much more weight to bare demonstrates this

more than enough. 

 

I am only glad that the competition is still lost - Fuji x trans bodies are a disaster and so is Sony ...

unfortunately the Q will serve many as an example

... and they will imitate that.