Thinking of switching to M10

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, I don’t abuse my cameras so should be ok.

  

 

I am always amazed to read reports like this, makes me questions Leica’s quality control when they despatch new cameras. I guess if I bought from a dealer in person then I should test the camera on the spot?

Also re calibration, is it still necessary to calibrate your camera body to lenses?

Thanks all.

There is a vast difference between QC on a hand-assembled product and a roboticized process. With an automatic assembly line one pulls one product in a thousand off and tests it to destruction, as production errors are systematic; human errors are random, so one would need one inspector per worker to cover 100%. And even then, who would inspect the inspectors?

[Advertisement]

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

[sillbeers15]

Weight factor should not be the only consideration for a decision between M10 & SL. I have both and keep both.

If you travel with SL + 24-90mm = M10 + 3 primes (at least) in application and you get AF, weather proof & no need to change lens also means carrying less bulk & weight than M10. Unless you want shallow DOF, Manual focus and change lenses on the go, the M10 is more rewarding.

[Reciprocity]

Ok, I am a bit taken aback by the defending of brand new Leica M cameras either shipping with mis-aligned RF's or them being delicate enough to come out of calibration from the factory that easily.

 

And the reason for my surprise is that unless I am mistaken, Leica does not encourage or condone in warranty terms the owner of the camera to make RF adjustments. Sending the camera in to have this done can take weeks.

 

So please, will someone correct me if I am wrong about owners of the cameras possibly voiding the warranty if they make RF adjustments themselves? I get that it is somewhat of a gentleman's agreement on this site, but that seems to be quite a hokey excuse to give Leica a pass on this in terms of QC if Leica themselves says it will void the warranty if for whatever reason they feel they have discovered this.

 

It's a $6,800 camera that continues to be designed around the long standing idea and expert implementation of precise rangefinder focusing, to give them a pass on it and reduce it to "No big deal man, just fix it your self" when that would void the warranty in Leica's eyes is kind, well: Crazy.

[marcg]

Again, it is unreasonable to blame Leica QC. You assume that the camera left the factory needing adjustment. It is unreasonable to expect that every camera maintain factory adjustment. To me it isn't a problem. In fact, Leica made an easy way to adjust rangefinder alignment. It's the nature of the system. If you want something that never needs any maintenance/adjustment then a Leica rangefinder isn't the best choice. 

 

Unhelpful, indeed...

 

You are mixing and matching here.

 

The comment you are responding to is about a new Leica in need of adjustment from the word go.

 

You then go on to criticise people who expect their cameras never to need any maintenance or adjustment.

 

Of course these are two completely different issues.

 

1. Any reasonable Leica owner would expect their camera to reach them in perfect working order.
2. Any reasonable Leica owner would expect their camera in normal circumstances to remain in perfect working order for a reasonable period of time.
3. Any reasonable Leica owner would understand that their camera would need maintenance and adjustment from time to time.

 

I don't see that the person to whose comment you are apparently responding has said anything to disagree with the above three propositions.

 

I don't see that you have said anything to disagree with at least the second two propositions – although maybe you feel that the owner of a new Leica camera which arrives in need of adjustment should consider that that comes with the territory.

 

You haven't really made that point very clear.

[LocalHero1953]

I don't think you (Edit - responding to post #23) should interpret the strange responses of 1-2 people as a gentlemen's agreement on the forum to overlook Leica QC problems. Of course you are right and reasonable to expect a new Leica to work as it should, especially if it has been signed off as checked. 

 

It is almost impossible for us to compare Leica's QC performance to other brands based on forum comments. I suspect (but have no real knowledge) they are neither better nor worse than those of other brands despite the high cost but, as Jaap says, of a different pattern.

 

In answer to your question, just about any manufacturer says that opening a device for attempts at self-repair can/will void a warranty. OTOH the reports of Leica refusing to honour a warranty are rare. They happen, but more often Leica will fix stuff that happens way out of warranty for little or no charge - it's happened to me (rangefinder realignment after I dropped the camera).

 

Buying into Leica means buying into an autistic company - it can be brilliant and a delight, and it can drive you nuts, it does things in its own time and communications from it are often random or non-existent, but the balance for most people is heavily on the positive side. 

[Reciprocity]

When I said gentleman's agreement, I was referring to tips and pointers on RF adjustment found in other threads, not this one.

 

I suppose I was going somewhere in framing the question the way I did. Its obvious that over the progression of digital M bodies and on balance, Leica has made it fairly easy to adjust both orientations of the RF. I understand such tedious work is not for everyone but since this might be the most common adjustment and or maintenance to perform on a Leica M, it stands to reason that it needs to be more convenient for the owner / user of the camera to implement.

 

On DSLR's, AF fine tune is a reality that on early models, did not exist and the lack of it created problems. I'm not saying put knobs or dials on the camera to make adjustments on the fly but maybe make it standard practice to include instructions in how a user can do this with the current setup & something that makes it not a warranty voiding item if done without a mishap like damaging the shutter or dropping something into the camera when doing the vertical setting.

 

In my experience, once in spec, none of my RF's ever really go out. Only drops seem to make that happen and one would hope they are rare, my only one being someone knocking my M6 off a cot onto a wood floor some 2 feet below.

 

One odd thing I have noticed with the M10 that I don't see with my other M bodies is that the vertical alignment is affected by the alignment of my eye as it relates to how it is centered up and down on the eyepiece. I can't recall if this was the case with my M240 but it certainly is not with my M6 or M3. I can come in at any angle or position on the latter two and the alignment of the patch remains the same. But on the M10, I can see the vertical alignment on the M10's RF patch change as my eye position changes, it's a bit annoying.

 

To the well seasoned M user, the RF mechanism is a known quantity in regards to it being on or off and can be quite the distraction when it does go out. But to the new user of a Leica camera, it is quite off putting to have to deal with it out of the box. I only say the last part because I have a friend who bought a M246 last year and I only ever saw her use the camera with an EVF attachment. When I asked her why that was, she said she was not sure that she understood the RF. I checked it and sure enough, the darn vertical was out and according to her, it was like that the day it showed up.

 

In regards to the last item, there are expected QC issues and then there are ones that after decades should be much easier to keep in control. The RF being in perfect alignment from the factory has got to be the top one in my opinion, because it is certainly the most annoying to be out of spec when this camera is all about manual focus.

 

Leica is a great if not quirky camera company, but they have more and more competition every day from other options, especially iPhones. The last thing we need to do is develop or continue to have some dated county club mentality in how seasoned users view QC items and the hall pass I see given to them on an enthusiast forum. That won't serve them so well in recruiting new users.

[Frase]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You really shouldn't blame Leica QC for rangefinder adjustment issues, rather you should praise Leica engineers for making rangefinder adjustment possible. It is quite simple to adjust on your own. The hardest part is removing the Leica logo to get to the adjustment screw (it just takes a warm finger and a bit of patience). 

 

The Visoflex 020 works well for me. I often use non Leica glass and it is great for that. I would not want to use it all the time though as I prefer the OVF. One big reason I would not want to use it all the time is that it covers the shutter speed dial. Which can be very frustrating. Perhaps if I used it more I would get used to it...

 

If you don't get along with the M10, the used market is pretty hot right now. 

 

Having adjusted my M9 myself you make it sound easy, the adjustment screw under the logo only adjusts vertical alignment nothing else. On the M10 it is slightly easier as you can always check against live view but its still not a two minute job.

[M11 for me]

There are detailed instructions about doing the adjustment on the web; I think even in this forum but I can not find it now. I remember that it is an iterative process . . . . Definitely not a 2 mins job. 

[250swb]

Ok, I am a bit taken aback by the defending of brand new Leica M cameras either shipping with mis-aligned RF's or them being delicate enough to come out of calibration from the factory that easily.

 

 

Have you ever considered all the Leica rangefinder cameras that don't need to go back to the factory or get a home remedy? What I am taken aback by is the continual misunderstanding of how the internet and human nature works. Like any internet community you hear of the horror stories and you hear the urban myths because people like to complain, but here's the rub, the happy people are quiet. It's a tiny, tiny fraction of cameras that have genuine rangefinder problems (or any problem), and yet you are 'taken aback' in outrage.

 

It's a similar misunderstanding of reality that has already been rehashed in this thread, that Leica body's and lenses need to be matched to each other. It's a falsehood, it always has been, but even after all these years people are willing to believe the myth because it's more tempting to believe in or to prepare for catastrophe than to think everything will work properly. And why shouldn't DIY warriors have a go at fixing something themselves? They are taking control, when things go wrong they don't want to be a victim of circumstance by sending their camera off for six weeks when they can fix something in thirty minutes. It's called empowerment, it's a great feeling, try it.

[jaapv]

*10!

I call it the Calimero syndrome...

Over the years I have owned 17 M cameras. I have needed three rangefinder adjustments, each time because the camera got banged or vibrated. Each time I had it corrected by a local workshop as a walk-in.

Additionally there was a piece of fluff caught in the roller wheel once, DIY.

[jaapv]

Having adjusted my M9 myself you make it sound easy, the adjustment screw under the logo only adjusts vertical alignment nothing else. On the M10 it is slightly easier as you can always check against live view but its still not a two minute job.

Maybe not two, but I have never see or heard of more than ten... Of course there may be some ham-fisted owners around

[jdlaing]

Adjusting the rangefinder DOES NOT VOID THE WARRANTY.

[onasj]

I just wanted to point out that the M10 was designed to be especially resistant to rangefinder calibration changes, and in the two M10s I've owned and two more in Leica stores that I've tested, the rangefinder calibration has been perfect to my eye, shooting the 50 lux, 50 noct, or 90 APO wide open against an angled text background at various distances.  No one should shy away from an M10 because of a fear of RF calibration issues, unless your purchasing method offers no returns and no hope for service... and even then I think the likelihood of a problem is very small indeed.

[albertknappmd]

I would go with the M10. It is the best digital M they have ever made...

[Reciprocity]

Have you ever considered all the Leica rangefinder cameras that don't need to go back to the factory or get a home remedy? What I am taken aback by is the continual misunderstanding of how the internet and human nature works. Like any internet community you hear of the horror stories and you hear the urban myths because people like to complain, but here's the rub, the happy people are quiet. It's a tiny, tiny fraction of cameras that have genuine rangefinder problems (or any problem), and yet you are 'taken aback' in outrage.

 

It's a similar misunderstanding of reality that has already been rehashed in this thread, that Leica body's and lenses need to be matched to each other. It's a falsehood, it always has been, but even after all these years people are willing to believe the myth because it's more tempting to believe in or to prepare for catastrophe than to think everything will work properly. And why shouldn't DIY warriors have a go at fixing something themselves? They are taking control, when things go wrong they don't want to be a victim of circumstance by sending their camera off for six weeks when they can fix something in thirty minutes. It's called empowerment, it's a great feeling, try it.

I think I am going to make this my last post, reason being is that I don't really care for people being rude and telling me things "It's called empowerment, it's a great feeling, try it."

 

Of course I adjust my own RF, even if it does void the warranty. Because having to do this kind of thing in the field to keep me working is more important than the risk of losing a warranty.

 

I merely posted what I did on behalf of people who either don't frequent Internet forums or are new to Leica RF cameras and would not want to risk dealing with the issue themselves.

 

On a final note, it was mentioned by a moderator above that he just walks into the local shop and gets the adjustment made. I would venture to guess that most don't have that kind of proximity to a place to have that done, so there we go with more assumptions.

 

There is just too much folks, too much snobbery, too much chest beating and too much rudeness on this forum. I don't have the energy or the tolerance for it at this point in my life so I bid you all farewell.

 

Enjoy your Leica cameras in good health as I will mine!

[jaapv]

It has never been reported that Leica considers adjusting the RF as anything else than maintenance, thus not warrantee- voiding. This has been the case since 1954

[Tailwagger]

One odd thing I have noticed with the M10 that I don't see with my other M bodies is that the vertical alignment is affected by the alignment of my eye as it relates to how it is centered up and down on the eyepiece. I can't recall if this was the case with my M240 but it certainly is not with my M6 or M3. I can come in at any angle or position on the latter two and the alignment of the patch remains the same. But on the M10, I can see the vertical alignment on the M10's RF patch change as my eye position changes, it's a bit annoying.

 

I can confirm a similar experience, which until now I put down purely to a combination of wearing glasses and the use of the RRS grip.   More precisely the presence of the L-bracket.  This isn't an issue with my M240 (which also lives its life wearing an RRS grip/l-bracket).  Perhaps the problem is more general than I realized, but what I've noted is that as the body has slimmed down from 240 to 10, the Arca spec hasn't. As a result the vertical bracket juts further rearward off the body making it more difficult to place ones eye square to the finder.  While I've thought about removing the L-vertical, in practice I'm not experiencing noticeably higher miss rates and as half the reason for having the full kit on 24/7 is having a steel exoskeleton for  the added protection it offers, I've learned to live with it. 

[Jeff S]

I, too, found that eye centering was more critical compared the M240 that I traded.  But now it has become second nature.  And I really like the M10 VF improvements in magnification, eye relief and larger opening.  The icing on the cake was when I determined that, in addition to glasses,  a + .5 diopter could further help my aging eyes.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Printmaker]

Hi all,

 

Have had an SL and the 24-90 for 18 months, great camera and wonderful IQ but the size/weight means I am not using it as much as I could. I am thinking of moving to the M but have a couple of considerations on which I would appreciate some advice from owners.

 

Rangefinder robustness - I have read too many threads where people have had to get their RF adjusted or sent back to Leica to get adjusted, is the M10 any more robust? Is RF calibration really an issue?

 

As I have been shooting mirrorless for some years now (range of Fujis before this, my first Leica), I would need the comfort blanket of the EVF on the M10. I cant find much information on the Visoflex (Type 020), can anyone compare it to the SL EVF?

 

Thanks.

 

Out of 6 M cameras, the only one that required viewfinder adjustment was my old M8. And even this was only noticeable wide open and in close. Viewfinder adjustment would be my last concern when considering a M camera.

 

I've shot with a SL. It is a nice camera but I prefer the M10. The SL offers a better view than the M10 with a visoflex. But the M(10) Leica offers a nicer user experience. Consequently,  I only use the visoflex when framing tightly or when using a tripod. 

[Renatus]

I had the same issue, but I removed the red dot and made the adjustment my self and replaced the red dot with a black one. The RF is perfect now, only problem currently is that there is now some dust specs on the inside of my VF's eyepiece.

QC does seem to be a fairly consistent weak area of Leica's production outcomes.

To the OP, the M10 is a great canera, the best digital M they have made to date for sure.

My M10 rangefinder was out from new too, and not an internet purchase. But I agree that the 10 is best yet.