jaapv Posted May 17, 2017 Share #141 Posted May 17, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) No, the two are linked. It appears to me to be rather impossible to to the one without the other. The position as you formulate it should have been the subject of this discussion from the beginning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 17, 2017 Posted May 17, 2017 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Leica Ends Free Sensor Replacement for M9/Monochrom Bodies. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
johnwolf Posted May 17, 2017 Share #142 Posted May 17, 2017 (edited) Hi everyone, Thank you all for useful information over the years. Now it seems I must bother everyone with my sensor woes. Could this be corrosion? This is from my Monochrom, which turns five mid-August this year. (Please follow link to gallery, there are four samples.) Thanks again, Kjetil Kjetil, sure looks like it with the telltale white halos. Best to send it in immediately. The repair will likely take a while, especially now, but will be worth the wait.Consider yourself fortunate. John Edited May 17, 2017 by johnwolf 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2017 Share #143 Posted May 17, 2017 Jaap, this sounds like spin to me, perhaps reformulated for the backlash. From the announcement: Here, the customer pays a share of the replacement costs for the affected CCD sensor amounting to 982 euros (825 euros plus 19% VAT). Included in this programme is a free general overhaul* of your Leica M camera The customer pays for the sensor; it's those additional services that are free.The opposite of what they are now saying. With language this clear and specific, it's hard to see it as faulty communication. John That is exactly the faulty communication. You are not paying for the sensor replacement. That would cost 1800 Euro. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted May 17, 2017 Share #144 Posted May 17, 2017 (edited) . Edited May 17, 2017 by Paul J Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 17, 2017 Share #145 Posted May 17, 2017 (edited) That is exactly the faulty communication. You are not paying for the sensor replacement. That would cost 1800 Euro. I find it hard to believe you are now peddling this angle. Interestingly, the new policy is similar in spirit to what Leica have been doing with some other repairs. I was warned by Leica Mayfair that my request to have the DX contacts of my M7 upgraded might result in a substantial bill for an "associated" CLA (it turned out that they did the work for free). A member of this forum recently sent his MP in to have a screw replaced in the film rewind knob only to be given an estimate of around a thousand euro for the work "including a full CLA". They later backtracked and offered to do the fix without CLA for about £180 (although they did apparently throw-in a free crack in the VF glass). Edited May 17, 2017 by wattsy 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
valstadsve Posted May 17, 2017 Share #146 Posted May 17, 2017 Kjetil, sure looks like it with the telltale white halos. Best to send it in immediately. The repair will likely take a while, especially now, but will be worth the wait.Consider yourself fortunate. John Thanks for a speedy reply John, I hope you're right. I will bring it to the store tomorrow. Kjetil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go Figure Posted May 17, 2017 Share #147 Posted May 17, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) What do you think are our chances to take "Sensorgate" over to https://www.change.org/ ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted May 17, 2017 Share #148 Posted May 17, 2017 (edited) Owning Leica has become an expensive gamble and what was made up with faith that wrongs would be put right is now shot. It's just one headache after another that I can no longer be bothered with. Edited May 17, 2017 by Paul J 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2017 Share #149 Posted May 17, 2017 I find it hard to believe you are now peddling this angle. Interestingly, the new policy is similar in spirit to what Leica have been doing with some other repairs. I was warned by Leica Mayfair that my request to have the DX contacts of my M7 upgraded might result in a substantial bill for an "associated" CLA (it turned out that they did the work for free). A member of this forum recently sent his MP in to have a screw replaced in the film rewind knob only to be given an estimate of around a thousand euro for the work "including a full CLA". They later backtracked and offered to do the fix without CLA for about €150. Ok, I went to the trouble of obtaining additional information and you are calling it "peddling" Nice. Sit in your corner and sneer if you wish, but I prefer the full picture. Then we can have a meaningful discussion. Do I like the situation? No. I don't. See my previous posts. Do I see the reasoning behind it? Yes, I do, and it should have been explained from the beginning. Did Leica miscommunicate, both in 2014 and now? Yes, they did. Do I like having two cameras with a potential problem? No, I don't. I am sending them in in the hope that they are both affected and get the improved sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert M Poole Posted May 17, 2017 Share #150 Posted May 17, 2017 What do you think would be a reasonable settlement? Replacement for a set time? 5 years/10 years? Replacement of all camera sensors even if bought used? Replacement of all old sensors as a precaution even if corrosion has not occurred? For reference the original statement on their website said: "Leica offers a free replacement service for the CCD sensors of cameras affected by this problem as a goodwill arrangement. This goodwill arrangement applies regardless of the age of the camera and also covers sensors that have already been replaced in the past. Customers who have already been charged for the replacement of a sensor affected by this problem will receive a refund." 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 17, 2017 Share #151 Posted May 17, 2017 Ok, I went to the trouble of obtaining additional information and you are calling it "peddling" Nice. Sit in your corner and sneer if you wish, but I prefer the full picture. Then we can have a meaningful discussion. Did Leica miscommunicate, both in 2014 and now? Yes, they did. I don't think I'm sneering, I just don't see what the cost of the sensor has to do with anything. The sensor replacement programme has always come with a cost to Leica (I was told an almost exact same similar figure of €1800 back in 2014). If there is any miscommunication about how the costs are accounted for I don't think it is relevant because it doesn't alter the outcome for the camera owner. Leica made a commitment in 2014 that the sensor problem would be resolved by them, free of charge, for the lifetime of the camera. Three years later they have chosen to renege on that commitment. It is as simple as that. 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go Figure Posted May 17, 2017 Share #152 Posted May 17, 2017 What do you think would be a reasonable settlement? Replacement for a set time? 5 years/10 years? Replacement of all camera sensors even if bought used? Replacement of all old sensors as a precaution even if corrosion has not occurred? For reference the original statement on their website said: "Leica offers a free replacement service for the CCD sensors of cameras affected by this problem as a goodwill arrangement. This goodwill arrangement applies regardless of the age of the camera and also covers sensors that have already been replaced in the past. Customers who have already been charged for the replacement of a sensor affected by this problem will receive a refund." Thank you for bringing up possible settlement points. I was hoping a US lawyer might come forward here on the forum to advise this is why I did not start a petition myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen.w Posted May 17, 2017 Share #153 Posted May 17, 2017 Did Leica miscommunicate, both in 2014 and now? Yes, they did. Only if by "miscommunicated" you mean "went back on a clear, unequivocal promise". That for me is the rub, not the new policy as such (which is arguably an acceptable compromise between the company and us users). 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafikiphoto Posted May 17, 2017 Share #154 Posted May 17, 2017 I am sending them in in the hope that they are both affected and get the improved sensor. Do you advocate anyone with an old-type sensor doing this Jaap? I can't see any corrosion on mine and, from your post, I presume you can't on yours either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2017 Share #155 Posted May 17, 2017 TBH, I didn't even bother to check myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted May 17, 2017 Share #156 Posted May 17, 2017 Do you advocate anyone with an old-type sensor doing this Jaap? I can't see any corrosion on mine and, from your post, I presume you can't on yours either. For whatever it's worth, I sent them my M9 with corrosion, and they returned it after denying that there was corrosion. A day later they presumably accepted that there was corrosion and allowed an 'upgrade'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwolf Posted May 17, 2017 Share #157 Posted May 17, 2017 I don't think I'm sneering, I just don't see what the cost of the sensor has to do with anything. The sensor replacement programme has always come with a cost to Leica (I was told an almost exact same similar figure of €1800 back in 2014). If there is any miscommunication about how the costs are accounted for I don't think it is relevant because it doesn't alter the outcome for the camera owner. Leica made a commitment in 2014 that the sensor problem would be resolved by them, free of charge, for the lifetime of the camera. Three years later they have chosen to renege on that commitment. It is as simple as that. Especially since they continued to sell cameras they knew to be defective. The good faith commitment was vital to that proposition. They should modify the announcement to remove the time limit for original purchasers. I think it's reasonable to now exclude second-hand owners. John 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2017 Share #158 Posted May 17, 2017 Only if by "miscommunicated" you mean "went back on a clear, unequivocal promise". That for me is the rub, not the new policy as such (which is arguably an acceptable compromise between the company and us users). I have no issue with your first sentence, nor the second one for that matter. However, I am looking at the outcome, which I agree with you might be deemed acceptable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2017 Share #159 Posted May 17, 2017 Especially since they continued to sell cameras they knew to be defective. The good faith commitment was vital to that proposition. They should modify the announcement to remove the time limit for original purchasers. I think it's reasonable to now exclude second-hand owners. John I don't. The issue is with the product, not with the owner. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert M Poole Posted May 17, 2017 Share #160 Posted May 17, 2017 Thank you for bringing up possible settlement points. I was hoping a US lawyer might come forward here on the forum to advise this is why I did not start a petition myself. I have no idea of the legal side of it, just speaking hypothetically. 1 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