Erwin Puts disenchanted

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On Facebook

Can Leica be trusted?

 

Companies that work for other companies or for consumers need trust as a basis for transactions. Now that many companies are no longer trusted (software to manipulate emission, sweatshops for cheap clothing, and so on) and critical reviews and investigations are difficult to access, this topic is more important than ever.

The actual Leica company is no exception. In the past, it was an engineer-driven company and the information about its products was reliable and could be checked. Critique by outsiders was taken seriously and even invited to make a better product. When the company informed the users that the high shutter speeds were working within ±30 % of its nominal value this info could be accepted as accurate. Most information was not readily and publicly available, but it was possible to access the responsible person within the company.

This attitude has changed since the company has become product- and market-driven. Insightful technical information is hardly available and the marketing department does its best to generate confusion. Are the Summarit/2.4 designs really optically fully redesigned Summarit/2.5 lenses. How does the new sensor in the M10 differ from the previous design in the M/240? Every new sensor is claimed to have optimized shapes for the lenslets, but there is no technical information about the exact shape and its impact on the final image quality. The actual reliance on the reports by field testers for some of the practical consequences of the newly introduced technology is not sufficient as most reviewers do not use measurements to support their claims but only visual comparisons. We know how unreliable the human visual perception is: what you see is what you want to see.

The M10 uses compression software to reduce the size of the files in order to increase the storage capacity of the buffer. But there is no information about the type and quality of the software. The SL is assumed to have a very fast AF, but one needs numerical information to be sure that this claim is substantiated. The fact that field and magazine testers say that the AF is very fast is not good enough for the inquiring mind who needs to base conclusions of facts. Every other product in the photographic market has comparable claims.

In the past the Leitz technical bulletins were reliable sources of information and could be used for decision making. Now we have only diffuse marketing speak. This is of course the trend of the day and not different from what is available from other companies. Leica buyers who pay a premium price, should be entitled to receive all technical information available, that helps to understand why Leica is what is claims to be.

[willeica]

Definitely a case for the application of the 'need to know principle'.

 

 

My M10 is vastly better than my M240. I don't really know why or how, but it is. I generally try to avoid 'paralysis by analysis'.

 

William

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

The thread title says it all.

[TomB_tx]

Erwin's complaint crosses most industries these days. The industrial company I started with in 1969 was family-owned, and nearly all management came up through Engineering, and most employees worked there their entire careers. Their products were known to be always reliable and had top tech information available.

They were sold to a large corporation a few months after I started, then sold again in the 1980s to a larger holding company. Engineers were told they should consider themselves as contractors, and the company had no obligation to keep them on after a project was finished.

"Market Driven" became the catch-word, where it used to be leading the market with products customers didn't yet know they needed - but soon found out. Now it's "chase the market" - and usually behind it.

I retired after 40 years - with relief.

[UliWer]

In his complaint Mr. Puts implies that Leica said something which just is not true:

 

Did Leica say that the new versions of the Summarit-M lenses were fully redesigned? He implies this. Looking into the announcement of the new Summarits in the Blog of this Forum I read the clear statement that there was no new optical design - information given at the very beginning, and I don't think that the Blog had some secret sources which were hidden from Mr. Puts. When he mentioned the new versions in his own blog, he also did not hint that there was a new optical design.

 

When he talks about the good old times, he mentiones that "most information was not readily and publicly available", but that it "was possible to access the responsible person within the company." Did any customer have this access, or only privileged people - like Mr. Puts?

 

Does he rant against Leica, or just against some people there who became shy of his writing style mixing up "philosophy" with unreliable details?

Edited August 19, 2017 by UliWer

[pico]

Did Leica say that the new versions of the Summarit-M lenses were fully redesigned?

 

Good question. Given the advances in manufacturing processes, glass composition and coating it is likely infeasible to replicate the original lenses; the Summarit-M is improved by necessary cost-effective manufacturing.

Edited August 20, 2017 by pico

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This article also appears as his latest blog post, and is only one of a series of articles expressing his dissatisfaction not just with the company, but most of its digital products....

 

http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/

 

He dislikes most everything except the film cameras. In the previous post, in one paragraph, he disses the SL and its lenses, the TL2, the X series, and the S.... after not much positive about digital Ms, or most other digital gear.

 

Funny that not long before this sour vibe, he was commenting that lens reviews were becoming mostly repetitive and unnecessary, since quality was so consistently high and that distinctions were minimal.

 

It seems that his Leica relationships have soured, and that perhaps affected his opinions about a broader range of issues.

 

Jeff

Edited August 20, 2017 by Jeff S

[jaapv]

And to simplify things - "can Leica be trusted?"  I fail to see what trust has to do with the amount of technical information given to reviewers. Was Rolls-Royce untrustworthy in the time that the number of horsepower was given as: "sufficient"?

When the original question s a non-sequitur, the subsequent argument fails.

[almoore]

His complaint that most reviewers rely on 'only visual comparisons' is telling as to where he's coming from.

 

If your primary interest in a camera or lens is photographic, then why would you care about anything other than the visually verifiable? The numbers are irrelevant.

Edited August 20, 2017 by almoore

[masjah]

Erwin Puts disenchanted?

 

So what? So am I, with all sorts of things. My telly and hi-fi amplifiers (not the one I built myself) are riddled with crappy soldering and cheap components. Marilyn can't get decently made clothes for any money. The electric kettle never worked properly and had to go back. Clearly the whole world is falling apart.

 

I would recommend to EP that he does what I do, and start enjoying being a grumpy old man.

[Ko.Fe.]

I'm using his book to learn about Leitz lenses. Giant and fundamental work with easy to understand descriptions and not so much technicalities. 

 

Does 2.4 comes with same kind of booklet as 2.5 comes with? I never seen lens booklet with optical and build schema before. It is very open approach.

 

Yes, where are some companies which tells how fast AF is in numbers. Yet, in real world situation, those numbers are something which exist only on paper. 

Sure, were are manufacturers with pages dedicated for some technicalities about sensor, yet, it has nothing to do with image taking in the real world. 

 

I like Leica marketing approach. On their web site most of lenses and cameras are described with very primitive, yet, working (in terms of sales) words. What is the point of dumping all of the numbers and details if majority of Leica customers are not into it?

To satisfy gearheads?  From what I read here or at any forum with modern Leica users it is not what most of us are after with Leica.

 

If need to know about lens on camera, I read users review.