Sensor replacement and market impact

[capelini61]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On ‎6‎/‎24‎/‎2020 at 9:07 AM, jaapv said:

Complete bollocks. The M9 sensor was the apex of CCD sensors, yes there was a corrosion problem with the coating of the cover glass, but Leica came through and replaced the sensors for free in the first five years, for half the price ever after, as long as stocks last, The redesigned cover glass (not the sensor itself)  - they actually did a redesign of  a  then seven year old sensor of ancient technology- it works flawlessly and the camera still produces images that many of us prefer over more advanced sensors. The basic sensor of the M8/M9 dates back 20 years or more by now. Quite impressive, given the results.

However, if you prefer analog photography, you will find many  similar-tuned minds in this forum. Enjoy.

is your point of view. When you have a camera and have already changed the sensor and the new one is in the same situation after a few years; Lack of luck? Of course not, the problem persists and the only guarantee would be for the company to take responsibility for the exchange until it reaches a definitive solution, which has not yet happened in my case. It is not a Maniqueista issue, analog photography is good and digital photography is bad. When someone proposes to invest in a leica digital camera with all the tradition of durability realizes the problems involved without definitive solutions he is disappointed. When I changed the sensor of my camera I was told that it was the top of the technology, it lasted 4 years!

[jaapv]

5 minutes ago, capelini61 said:

is your point of view. When you have a camera and have already changed the sensor and the new one is in the same situation after a few years; Lack of luck? Of course not, the problem persists and the only guarantee would be for the company to take responsibility for the exchange until it reaches a definitive solution, which has not yet happened in my case. It is not a Maniqueista issue, analog photography is good and digital photography is bad. When someone proposes to invest in a leica digital camera with all the tradition of durability realizes the problems involved without definitive solutions he is disappointed. When I changed the sensor of my camera I was told that it was the top of the technology, it lasted 4 years!

We didn't even see your sensor spots yet. Given the timeline it may well be that your camera has the non-corroding sensor ( which is a definitive solution) and you are seeing persistent dirt - it has happened before and several times.  Actually your last sentence suggests that this may well be the case.
If this is an old-type replacement sensor of less than five years Leica might even consider the pricing of a replacement. Without reaching out to Leica and getting an evaluation of the problem and indication of the solution there is no real substance to your complaint.

[Jeff S]

10 minutes ago, capelini61 said:

is your point of view. When you have a camera and have already changed the sensor and the new one is in the same situation after a few years; Lack of luck? Of course not, the problem persists and the only guarantee would be for the company to take responsibility for the exchange until it reaches a definitive solution, which has not yet happened in my case. It is not a Maniqueista issue, analog photography is good and digital photography is bad. When someone proposes to invest in a leica digital camera with all the tradition of durability realizes the problems involved without definitive solutions he is disappointed. When I changed the sensor of my camera I was told that it was the top of the technology, it lasted 4 years!

They clearly announced the permanent fix, along with process to repair. There was endless discussion here about prior replacements vs the the permanent solution. Have you worked with Leica since then on a fix?
 

 My only issue is that I thought there should have been a recall, without the 5 year limit.  I bought a used M9 Monochrom with the new sensor and full CLA,  along  full documentation from Leica and the dealer.

Jeff

Edited June 29, 2020 by Jeff S

[ianman]

14 minutes ago, capelini61 said:

When you have a camera and have already changed the sensor and the new one is in the same situation after a few years; Lack of luck? Of course not, the problem persists and the only guarantee would be for the company to take responsibility for the exchange until it reaches a definitive solution, which has not yet happened in my case.

Do you know when the sensor was changed? If it was before end 2015 (IIRC) they would have installed an "old" version which was of course likely to develop the well known issue.

I agree with you that they should replace your second corroded sensor with a new generation one for free. I have been saying for years that there should have been either a full recall of the models at risk or a timeless free exchange program for corroded sensors (well within reason, I'm not talking 200 years!!). Their attitude during the whole debacle was at best questionable. There was no attempt to warn owners of the potential issue, even though they have a database of registered owners.

I was not very active on this forum for a year or so at the time my sensor developed the issue and it was only after reading some posts on the forum that I learned about the corrosion problem. And even then , when I contacted customer support with a sample picture clearly showing that mine had problems, they denied it and said it was just dust. Luckily I went through the shop where I bought it and they dealt with the situation.

[jaapv]

24 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

They clearly announced the permanent fix, along with process to repair. There was endless discussion here about prior replacements vs the the permanent solution. Have you worked with Leica since then on a fix?
 

 My only issue is that I thought there should have been a recall, without the 5 year limit.  I bought a used M9 Monochrom with the new sensor and full CLA,  along  full documentation from Leica and the dealer.

Jeff

I think Leica was on the horns of a dilemma back then. They replaced all sensors for free up to five years - doing so until the end of time would have been prohibitively expensive. The 50% for cameras that were older than five years - and thus written off for 50% - was maybe not the best solution from a customer point of view, I for one did not like it, but at least it was defensible. I agree that sensors that were replaced less than five years ago and are still of the old type and corroding should be replaced under guaranty nevertheless.

The way it was communicated was abysmal - maybe an indication of the upset this failure caused internally at Leica.

[ianman]

3 minutes ago, jaapv said:

They replaced all sensors for free up to five years

No they didn't. And that is part of the problem. They only replaced that were corroded. They should have replaced ALL old sensors, corroded or not.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I think Leica was on the horns of a dilemma back then. They replaced all sensors for free up to five years - doing so until the end of time would have been prohibitively expensive. The 50% for cameras that were older than five years - and thus written off for 50% - was maybe not the best solution from a customer point of view, I for one did not like it, but at least it was defensible. I agree that sensors that were replaced less than five years ago and are still of the old type and corroding should be replaced under guaranty nevertheless.

The way it was communicated was abysmal - maybe an indication of the upset this failure caused internally at Leica.

The communications were indeed dreadful; a big part of the perception. I would have felt better if they would have allowed preemptive fixes during the 5 year period, scheduled appropriately.

Jeff

[jaapv]

15 minutes ago, ianman said:

No they didn't. And that is part of the problem. They only replaced that were corroded. They should have replaced ALL old sensors, corroded or not.

I doubt it - according to what I hear the majority have still not been replaced because they did not corrode. Of course most corroded sensors ended up on the internet skewing popular perception. Leica would have been crazy to replace all non-corroded sensors at over 1800 Euro in parts a pop. It would have set them back millions without justification.

(BTW, I meant corroded sensors )

[ianman]

The cost of replacement is not the issue, it is a serious design fault of a major part of the device and it is certainly not up to the customer to bear the cost. The sensor is of course at the very heart of a digital camera, it's not as if there was a problem with the covering discolouring or the white paint falling off.

It's also not as critical as brakes on a car.

Taking both of those aspect into consideration, morally they had two options. if they did not want to do a full recall, they should have kept the free exchange program open much much longer.

And if, as you say, "the majority" have not developed the issue, then Leica have nothing to fear, financially, even if they had done the right thing and kept the free exchange program running for 20 or so years.

[ianman]

26 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

The communications were indeed dreadful

Dreadful? From what I can recall they were non existent, except for a page hidden away on their website.

 

“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”

― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

 

Edited June 29, 2020 by ianman

[alwinvrm]

On 6/29/2020 at 4:00 PM, ianman said:

The cost of replacement is not the issue, it is a serious design fault of a major part of the device and it is certainly not up to the customer to bear the cost. The sensor is of course at the very heart of a digital camera, it's not as if there was a problem with the covering discolouring or the white paint falling off.

It's also not as critical as brakes on a car.

Taking both of those aspect into consideration, morally they had two options. if they did not want to do a full recall, they should have kept the free exchange program open much much longer.

And if, as you say, "the majority" have not developed the issue, then Leica have nothing to fear, financially, even if they had done the right thing and kept the free exchange program running for 20 or so years.

Yes, and exactly that made me as a very loyal Leica film user for decades, a person who doubts the brand that he loves, and all the service, quality, and commitment that was associated with the Leica brand as well, at least when it comes to digital. I am exaggerating a bit, but I was astonished when I learned about the M9 story.

[TomB_tx]

I guess I'm in the minority for thinking that Leica's handling of the issue was exemplary, and far beyond any legal requirements. Products are warranted against defects for a limited time as specified in the warranty notice, and Leica did much more than what the warranty required. Electronics technology - especially for consumer items - changes so fast that repairs become unfeasible (or impossible) once suppliers make parts obsolete. Based on experience with laptop PCs I expected digital cameras to have a very limited lifetime, so I thought getting 5 years out of my M9 was a reasonable expectation, as that is well out of warranty, and I expected the next models to have replaced it by then. With most electronic products today "repair" means replacement with the current model, and for items out of warranty I'd expect to pay for the repair (or replacement), with any discount being for "customer loyalty".

My M9 was trouble free for 7-years, sensor replaced with a new version free of charge when I suspected the start of corrosion, came back in perfect condition and is still going strong after 10 years. Much better than I expected, which influenced my purchase of a companion M10.

[jdlaing]

Your not a minority.

[setuporg]

What's interesting is a very similar pattern emerged with the AF motor failure in the S system, as my fellow bi-system friend, @Jeff S, can well attest to.  The good thing is that Leica customer service is sympathetic to owners, I've only had good experiences with them so far.  I think you can always discuss your particular situation, regardless of formalities.

[Jeff S]

4 minutes ago, setuporg said:

What's interesting is a very similar pattern emerged with the AF motor failure in the S system, as my fellow bi-system friend, @Jeff S, can well attest to.  The good thing is that Leica customer service is sympathetic to owners, I've only had good experiences with them so far.  I think you can always discuss your particular situation, regardless of formalities.

I only used an S006 for a brief period, deciding that it didn’t fit my shooting requirements. But I still use M bodies (since the 80’s), now along with the SL2, and did own the R system...another Leica story!...back in the day.

The S system AF motor failures presented a more egregious example of lack of communications and proactive policy making than the M9 sensor corrosion (or the M8 LCD failures).  In the latter two cases, after the LUF filled with user complaints, Leica execs personally responded right here on the forum, explaining the circumstances and outlining the policy remedy. Some may not have thought the policy sufficient, but at least customer feedback prompted communications, including an apology to customers. To date, I’ve still not read or heard an explanation from Leica, here or elsewhere, about the circumstance(s) causing the S failures, or any comparable level of public communications or concerns. That probably speaks to the popularity of the ‘bread and butter’ M system versus the niche S line.  Leica usually gets the message and responds with a fair (if not always ideal) policy approach to significant product failures, but it often seems to take a while... after a lot of feedback. 

Jeff

[alwinvrm]

I read a bit more about 'which digital Leica' and I am still jumping back and forth between the M9, 240, and, M10. I stumbled upon an older blogpost by Erwin Puts that made me realize, that what I need is a paradigm shift.

I need to accept that an analogue Leica has heirloom qualities, while a digital Leica is a beautiful digital camera with excellent lenses and a range finder. When its electronic circuits break it needs a new circuit board like any other digital camera and its serviceable life is hence probably much shorter than its analogue brothers.

 

"In the past the M6 was a pillar of trust and stability. Buying one would be an act of trust. You knew that the camera would be around for decades and repair parts would be available for generations.  ...

The old Leica created a justified legend, based on engineering superiority and in-depth photographic knowledge over a period of thirty years. The new Leica still has to prove itself. One may claim to be the rightful heir of the Leica myths, but one has to show that one deserves it."
Quoted from E. Puts        https://photo.imx.nl/

[ianman]

20 minutes ago, alwinvrm said:

repair parts would be available for generations

ha! Try telling that to M6 owners with broken lightmeters.

[alwinvrm]

3 minutes ago, ianman said:

ha! Try telling that to M6 owners with broken lightmeters.

Don't take it too literally, it's about the general idea 😀, that I should change the way I look at a digital Leica. Besides my M6 lightmeter still works and I prefer a handheld anyway; After us, the flood!

[pippy]

25 minutes ago, alwinvrm said:

..."In the past the M6 was a pillar of trust and stability. Buying one would be an act of trust. You knew that the camera would be around for decades and repair parts would be available for generations..."

The old Leica created a justified legend, based on engineering superiority...

Had Herr Puts been describing the purely mechanical Ms he would have made a bit more sense. The reliability of 'Electronics' has been the Achilles Heel of cameras for decades. Long after my M-D has gone the way of all digitals my M2 will still be soldiering on as happy as a lark.

Philip.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ianman]

Well yes, I meant the general idea too. The myth that all film Leicas are going to last to the end of time, and beyond. The fact is that one day, possibly sooner than we think, there will be not many people able to service/repair them. Parts may be repaired by 3d printed replacements, etc.