Leica SL not worth the investment, really bad service

[alan.y]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/15/2019 at 2:12 AM, Ingo said:

'Impact damage' (beside other) seems to be a standard phrase on Leicas cost estimates. 
In 2017 I sent them a recently bought 'mint condition' SL body to adjust the spirit level. The feedback was: 

General device status
            strong signs of wear
            Clean sensor
            Housing damaged
            Bayonet ring scratches
            Housing scratches
            impact damage

Replace sleeve
Adjust sensor position
Clean sensor
Firmware Update
Cleaning the eyepiece

Again: This body was two weeks old and never used outdoor. 
I have no idea what this BS is about.

Assuming your location is correct, it's strangely reassuring that Leica does this to German customers too.

 

[Advertisement]

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

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, metedme said:

Could you reset the camera or was it stuck ? 

If I fired the shutter, the camera locked up.

[Guest]

not just the SL....an expensive repair under warranty for my Q was declined because of a small 2-3mm scratch on the bottom plate which Leica claimed was 'impact damage".

I suppose technically it was 'impact' as the scratch was caused by a scrape along a concrete wall but it had nothing to do with the fault in my view.

 From Leica: "an impact damage excludes the warranty always. Nobody can tell what will be in future because of this impact."

Caveat emptor !

[metedme]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

If I fired the shutter, the camera locked up.

Wow thats not great, good that they replaced it, bad that a new camera locked up like that, 

[tobey bilek]

Please read all.  The damage you show does indicate abuse and I would not buy as a used camera.

However Leica service is s l o w.   I wonder if the leaders took their BMW in for service and it took 3 months.  It is pure BS.

I finally got caught on the third recall for Nikon D750. When I called they were told I could not provoke the recall issue.  They wanted the camera anyway.  Back to me in 3 weeks because of parts shortage and is calibrated way better than when new.

They also have a licensed repair center right near where I live and turn around is one week .  

I never got a Leica back faster than 2 months,  general 3 to 4.  So I give them a ZERO.

 

 

[SteveYork]

Glad I stayed with film.  Thought digital was supposed to be making things easier.

[metedme]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, tobey bilek said:

Please read all.  The damage you show does indicate abuse and I would not buy as a used camera.

However Leica service is s l o w.   I wonder if the leaders took their BMW in for service and it took 3 months.  It is pure BS.

I finally got caught on the third recall for Nikon D750. When I called they were told I could not provoke the recall issue.  They wanted the camera anyway.  Back to me in 3 weeks because of parts shortage and is calibrated way better than when new.

They also have a licensed repair center right near where I live and turn around is one week .  

I never got a Leica back faster than 2 months,  general 3 to 4.  So I give them a ZERO.

 

 

Would you buy it now ?? 

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!

[hillavoider]

interesting.....I'm still waiting (2+ months!!!) on my SL body to come back from Germany after the sensor failed, I am presuming its under warranty, but this is the second fault in under 12 months, and this is my 2nd SL body (first replaced), also 50mm SL lens had to be replaced..... I am thinking of selling it all, and I am rather over waiting for the 35mm to come out

Edited February 18, 2019 by hillavoider

[Ingo]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb alan.y:

Assuming your location is correct, it's strangely reassuring that Leica does this to German customers too.

 

I don't think German customers get preferential treatment. 

[thighslapper]

I do find it odd that Leica advertise the SL as a robust weather sealed professional camera and then attempt to invalidate the warranty due to trivial 'impact damage' ...... particularly when the majority of dings and scratches involve minimal if any 'impact' in the common meaning of the word. My SL has had a number of major 'impacts' (usually due to tripods blowing over) that left no mark on the camera or lens whatsoever, so the whole business of when to classify faults as 'damage' rather than 'mechanical failure' is a very grey area. 

Clearly there is a level of camera abuse that would lead to failure ...... but most manufacturers will consider 'fair wear and tear' from normal usage as allowable. Leica does appear to be unreasonably dogmatic in its approach ...... particularly as the original gear costs so much and their repair/recalibration costs are so high. 

Edited February 18, 2019 by thighslapper

[mich]

When I bought my M246, the rangefinder was way off. I sent it to Wetzlar in pristine condition and they fixed it under warranty. Nevertheless on the repair sheet they mentioned a scratch on the top of the body. When I got the camera back there was no sign of a scratch at all, it was still in pristine condition. I didn't waste much thought about it afterwards as it didn't seem to have any relevance.

But after reading this thread, a thought crossed my mind. What if there is a system behind it? Even if there seem to be no immediate consequences, the 'scratch = impact' is now documented and might bite you in the a... at a later stage. 😉

Honi soit qui mal y pense...

[mmradman]

I suspect well documented issues with digital M cameras; M8 IR contamination, M9 cracked sensor & corrosion, M240 falling strap lugs have left deep scar on Leica's balance sheet.  It may be that service department is under strict instruction to deflect any company liability for warranty repairs, hence minor scratches being described as major impact.

[BernardC]

I think that Leica documents any visible damage because they've had owners complain about a scratch that "wasn't there before." One way to deal with this is to list all blemishes when they receive the camera. You do the same with a rental car...

This is something they always do. I've had Leica document scratches that are barely visible! This did not affect warranty status, in my case.

People are making a link between this, and the fact that they are denied a warranty claim. It could be that Leica uses additional criteria, other than the number of visible scratches, to determine warranty status. Do they measure key body dimensions? Do they have a "tell," such as a deformable impact detector? Does the buit-in accelerometer log large impacts?

By the way, I am not opining on the validity of any specific warranty claim. I just wonder what criteria Leica uses.

[helged]

FWIW: I have also been frustrared regarding waiting time etc. That being said, I belong to those that are overall satisfied with the help and service at Wetzlar; several times at no cost outside warranty. And regarding the SL, I have had no problems after 3.5 years of constant use. 

[jankap]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb metedme:

Would you buy it now ?? 

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!

Are you a beta tester? I wouldn't even do this to my dogs.

I had a Summilux repaired once. The repair was reasonably fast. The result was perfect. I cannot complain. 

No, not true, my IIf failed in 1962, it was repaired and upgraded to a IIIf. /Jan

Edited February 18, 2019 by jankap

[RoySmith]

Last March I tripped and fell. The SL with 24-90 attached hit the concrete. The filter on the lens was cracked and damaged and could not be removed. Also the zoom mechanism had a catch in it. The SL body had a ding on the upper right and the Video Release Button wouldn’t operate. I sent them to Leica New Jersey. They sent the lens to Wetzlar who replaced the front barrel part of the lens and fixed the internals. Wetzlar did not charge for the lens repair.  New Jersey had to replace the body, so that was expensive. Both camera and lens were back in about 6 weeks. I was quite happy with the service.

 

 

[thighslapper]

mmm... I suppose if there is one thing consistent in all these tales it is that there seems to be little consistency.

However ...... as you only tend to hear the stories when things have gone badly it is hard to pin down the extent of any problems ..... if in fact they exist. 

To date I've had:

An M9 replaced because of some minor issues and high shutter count - which I moaned about as it was sold by Leica Mayfair as 'refurbished ex-demo - as new'.

2 M's RF re-calibrated (after which I did it myself).

6 lenses returned for re-calibration, half of which were out of warranty but was charged on only one occasion. 

T-M adapter and T returned for testing as I thought there was an infinity focussing issue (actually designed like that).

None took more than a couple of weeks and I really have no cause for complaint as I had other gear to use in the meantime.  

In total I've owned an M9, M9P, Monochrom, 2 M240's, M 240P, Monochrom M242, 2 X-Varios, T, TL, Q, CL, SL, most of the available SL and TL lenses and at various stages almost all of the available latest M lenses. 

I've had no problems with any cameras to date ....... only issues with the optical calibration of M lenses ..... notably the 50/1.4 (x3) , 75/2 and 18/3.8 and RC calibration issues on the M cameras ...... which was the main reason for dumping most of my M stuff and just sticking to the SL and CL. 

Either I've been very lucky, or Leica gear is fairly reliable ...... 

 

[metedme]

7 hours ago, jankap said:

Are you a beta tester? I wouldn't even do this to my dogs.

I had a Summilux repaired once. The repair was reasonably fast. The result was perfect. I cannot complain. 

No, not true, my IIf failed in 1962, it was repaired and upgraded to a IIIf. /Jan

Absolutely I would treat my dog like this, and this is my point, (to use a dog analogy) to me its a working farm dog, it was sold to me as a working dog and it should love love these conditions, how do I know this, because thats not my photo, that is from Leica, I have attached the original instagram post, as a professional if you are going to post these photos make sure the equipment is capable

.

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[FlashGordonPhotography]

22 hours ago, hemlock said:

not just the SL....an expensive repair under warranty for my Q was declined because of a small 2-3mm scratch on the bottom plate which Leica claimed was 'impact damage".

I suppose technically it was 'impact' as the scratch was caused by a scrape along a concrete wall but it had nothing to do with the fault in my view.

 From Leica: "an impact damage excludes the warranty always. Nobody can tell what will be in future because of this impact."

Caveat emptor !

Well, that wouldn't work in Oz. Here Leica would have to PROVE that the impact damage was responsible for the fault. Same thing for modifications and aftermarket accessories. Even the warranty period is subject to scrutiny under Australian law. Unfortunately, I have had to remind Leica's hopeless local service agent of this more than once.

Gordon

p.s. I also had a SL sensor out of alignment and warranty refused because of "impact damage". I let it go because I do work my SL bodies and I couldn't be 100% sure I may have given the camera a knock. My cameras are both unblemished so it must have been some type of internal sensor that was tripped.

[metedme]

6 hours ago, thighslapper said:

mmm... I suppose if there is one thing consistent in all these tales it is that there seems to be little consistency.

However ...... as you only tend to hear the stories when things have gone badly it is hard to pin down the extent of any problems ..... if in fact they exist. 

To date I've had:

An M9 replaced because of some minor issues and high shutter count - which I moaned about as it was sold by Leica Mayfair as 'refurbished ex-demo - as new'.

2 M's RF re-calibrated (after which I did it myself).

6 lenses returned for re-calibration, half of which were out of warranty but was charged on only one occasion. 

T-M adapter and T returned for testing as I thought there was an infinity focussing issue (actually designed like that).

None took more than a couple of weeks and I really have no cause for complaint as I had other gear to use in the meantime.  

In total I've owned an M9, M9P, Monochrom, 2 M240's, M 240P, Monochrom M242, 2 X-Varios, T, TL, Q, CL, SL, most of the available SL and TL lenses and at various stages almost all of the available latest M lenses. 

I've had no problems with any cameras to date ....... only issues with the optical calibration of M lenses ..... notably the 50/1.4 (x3) , 75/2 and 18/3.8 and RC calibration issues on the M cameras ...... which was the main reason for dumping most of my M stuff and just sticking to the SL and CL. 

Either I've been very lucky, or Leica gear is fairly reliable ...... 

 

I see a decent amount of your gear is M series and I love that stuff, Im also a professional user so 1 body will by default get worked to death, and I accept that, but I can't accept premature death, not after shooting with another brand for so long and having zero problems in insane conditions.

And this is my thing, Leica promote the SL as super durable, see attached photo, there

1 minute ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Well, that wouldn't work in Oz. Here Leica would have to PROVE that the impact damage was responsible for the fault. Same thing for modifications and aftermarket accessories. Even the warranty period is subject to scrutiny under Australian law. Unfortunately, I have had to remind Leica's hopeless local service agent of this more than once.

Gordon

p.s. I also had a SL sensor out of alignment and warranty refused because of "impact damage". I let it go because I do work my SL bodies and I couldn't be 100% sure I may have given the camera a knock. My cameras are both unblemished so it must have been some type of internal sensor that was tripped.

Hi Gordon 

I have followed your post from 2017 with this very issue, can you please get in touch, Im in Australia as well, what was the final outcome. who were you dealing with in Australia.