bags27 Posted March 26, 2019 Share #1 Posted March 26, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) Copied from the Warrantee section of the downloadable PDF on line manual "Please note: The splash water and dust protection coating is not permanent and will diminish over time. The user manual contains instructions on how to clean and dry the camera. The warranty does not cover liquid damage." Page 15 I took this from here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4378503 does anyone know if this is the same for other cameras, or is Leica just being hyper conservative? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 26, 2019 Posted March 26, 2019 Hi bags27, Take a look here Q2 weather proofing wears off . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Flilow06 Posted March 26, 2019 Share #2 Posted March 26, 2019 (edited) 25 minutes ago, bags27 said: Copied from the Warrantee section of the downloadable PDF on line manual "Please note: The splash water and dust protection coating is not permanent and will diminish over time. The user manual contains instructions on how to clean and dry the camera. The warranty does not cover liquid damage." Page 15 I took this from here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4378503 does anyone know if this is the same for other cameras, or is Leica just being hyper conservative? This is the same not just for other cameras, but anything water resistant (ie. wrist watches, flooring, clothing, etc.). Chemical coatings and finishes fade, seals and gaskets deteriorate... it's inevitable. Edited March 26, 2019 by Flilow06 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted March 26, 2019 Author Share #3 Posted March 26, 2019 Thanks, Flilow06. Makes sense: that's why we spray waterproofing on boots and fabric. And welcome to the site!! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Licheus Posted March 26, 2019 Share #4 Posted March 26, 2019 Rubber gaskets degrade overtime. But if done right will still last more than a decade. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matsaly Posted March 26, 2019 Share #5 Posted March 26, 2019 I'm considering selling my recently purchased Q-P and buying the Q2 primarily due to the water sealing. I will use the camera almost exclusively for general travel photography and like the reassurance of water sealing. That said I wonder if I am reading too much into the Q2's ability to withstand moisture intrusion. I realize it's not designed to be dunked into the ocean nor left out in a monsoon rain, but the warranty disclaimer that the coating will degrade over time gives me pause. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay. Posted March 27, 2019 Share #6 Posted March 27, 2019 (edited) Reading the dpr post got me curious so I had a look at the X-U, SL, and M 240/10 manuals, all of which are purportedly weather-sealed. X-U has a whole page dedicated to its IP68-rated weather sealing (p.94), but no mention of it 'diminishing over time'. Other than that, none of the other manuals mention weather sealing at all. Edited March 27, 2019 by jay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 27, 2019 Share #7 Posted March 27, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) Bizarre. The Q isn't made out of waxed cotton or leather is it? What is this 'coating' I wonder? Most weather sealed cameras are sealed with rubber O rings and gaskets to keep water out of the parts where it could otherwise get into the camera. Do Leica sell cans of their weatherproof coating to reapply and 'top up' the weather resistance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiritualized67 Posted March 27, 2019 Share #8 Posted March 27, 2019 My guess is that Leica uses seals AND the coating. The lens barrel is thicker to accommodate these seals, most likely. Leica says that the coating will diminish, but I'm not necessarily thinking that this is the only weather protection they've implemented in the Q2. If the coating is all they've done, I'd be disappointed too, but I can't imagine that's the case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ready Set Joe Posted June 20, 2019 Share #9 Posted June 20, 2019 On 3/26/2019 at 11:56 PM, Matsaly said: I'm considering selling my recently purchased Q-P and buying the Q2 primarily due to the water sealing. I will use the camera almost exclusively for general travel photography and like the reassurance of water sealing. That said I wonder if I am reading too much into the Q2's ability to withstand moisture intrusion. I realize it's not designed to be dunked into the ocean nor left out in a monsoon rain, but the warranty disclaimer that the coating will degrade over time gives me pause. I bought a Q2 a couple of months back, and brought it with me to Morocco. Spent a day in the Sahara, and used the Q2 to take pictures. Sand got onto the camera (as expected), due to just being out in the desert, but it affected the dials and the macro lens rotation. Brought it to the Leica store to get it cleaned up, but had to have it sent to the repair centre. They are now saying the warranty is void due to sand damage... which I think is crazy as the sand damage is purely because their weather sealing didn't work. So yeh, be warned — in reality, Leica do not stand behind their weather sealing claim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 20, 2019 Share #10 Posted June 20, 2019 The weathersealing is clearly defined in the IP rating 52 claimed by Leica, which means that dust may not enter in sufficient quantity to interfere with normal operation. You certainly have a clear case for warranty. 5 Dust Protected Ingress of dust is not entirely prevented, but it must not enter in sufficient quantity to interfere with the satisfactory operation of the equipment; complete protection against contact. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted June 20, 2019 Share #11 Posted June 20, 2019 The question is what dust is. Does sand belong into that category? I have my doubts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 20, 2019 Share #12 Posted June 20, 2019 I don't. Cambridge dictionary: Quote dry dirt in the form of powder that covers surfaces inside a building, or very small dry pieces of earth, sand, or other substances: The poster should start by complaining to the highest possible level in Wetzlar. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overpowered by Funk Posted June 20, 2019 Share #13 Posted June 20, 2019 2 hours ago, Ready Set Joe said: I bought a Q2 a couple of months back, and brought it with me to Morocco. Spent a day in the Sahara, and used the Q2 to take pictures. Sand got onto the camera (as expected), due to just being out in the desert, but it affected the dials and the macro lens rotation. Brought it to the Leica store to get it cleaned up, but had to have it sent to the repair centre. They are now saying the warranty is void due to sand damage... which I think is crazy as the sand damage is purely because their weather sealing didn't work. So yeh, be warned — in reality, Leica do not stand behind their weather sealing claim. This is disappointing news. I recently tired of the Q2 wait and cancelled my spot in line for the Q2. Instead, I purchased the Q-P, which I received yesterday. Thinking I'll keep a keen eye on this thread and matter. I intend to buy the Q2 once it's readily available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 20, 2019 Share #14 Posted June 20, 2019 On 3/26/2019 at 9:53 PM, bags27 said: Copied from the Warrantee section of the downloadable PDF on line manual "Please note: The splash water and dust protection coating is not permanent and will diminish over time. The user manual contains instructions on how to clean and dry the camera. The warranty does not cover liquid damage." Page 15 I took this from here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4378503 does anyone know if this is the same for other cameras, or is Leica just being hyper conservative? If the liquid IP rating is only 2, it is only resistant to spray coming in at a maximum angle of 15º from vertical, which means Leica can never guarantee against moisture damage. This is true for many other "weather resistant" cameras as well. One should always check the IP rating if this aspect is relevant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matsaly Posted June 20, 2019 Share #15 Posted June 20, 2019 This is very troubling news. I understand a manufacturer doesn't want to assume all risk imposed by a user in the field, but from the description of the circumstances encountered by the OP , I would make an argument for warranty coverage. What bothers me most is that I expect (perhaps naively) that a luxury good carries with it a commensurate level of service. I have a Mont Blanc pen which I used daily for over 15 years. When it needed servicing I took it to the retail store and it was sent back to the manufacturer for service. The factory essentially rebuilt my pen and it was in as good a condition as new when I got it back. Communication was responsive from the factory and the retailer even gave me a loaner pen to use during this period. I can't imagine Leica dong that. As Jaapv stated -escalate this to the highest level . Lets us know how they respond. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdmesa Posted June 21, 2019 Share #16 Posted June 21, 2019 IP52 barely qualifies as weather resistant. Leica SLs have been through hell and back with good results – no such disclaimer or IP rating for them. I imagine the IP rating being specified in the case of the Q2 is for CYA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ready Set Joe Posted November 7, 2019 Share #17 Posted November 7, 2019 Just an update on my issue with sand getting into my Q2: I raised the matter with the Leica store manager about the voiding of the warranty. He in turn apparently escalated it to his manager / someone more senior, and they decided to fix the camera for me free of charge as a gesture of goodwill. I’m still convinced it should have been covered under warranty, but given the outcome haven’t pressed the point. It was over four months in the service centre before I got the camera back in my hands. I should say, given that the camera was a couple of months old when I brought it with me to Morocco, it wouldn’t have been an issue with the weather sealing degrading over time (one would think). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lykaman Posted November 7, 2019 Share #18 Posted November 7, 2019 49 minutes ago, Ready Set Joe said: Just an update on my issue with sand getting into my Q2: I raised the matter with the Leica store manager about the voiding of the warranty. He in turn apparently escalated it to his manager / someone more senior, and they decided to fix the camera for me free of charge as a gesture of goodwill. I’m still convinced it should have been covered under warranty, but given the outcome haven’t pressed the point. It was over four months in the service centre before I got the camera back in my hands. I should say, given that the camera was a couple of months old when I brought it with me to Morocco, it wouldn’t have been an issue with the weather sealing degrading over time (one would think). Hi, I think the Store did you proud, weather sealing and The Sahara are IMHO 2 different kettles of fish.. The Sahara being a very harsh environment , one to which I would not subject any camera, maybe a waterproof rubber sealed unit would have been more appropriate.. L Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted November 8, 2019 Share #19 Posted November 8, 2019 Quote "Just an update on my issue with sand getting into my Q2: I raised the matter with the Leica store manager about the voiding of the warranty. He in turn apparently escalated it to his manager / someone more senior, and they decided to fix the camera for me free of charge as a gesture of goodwill..." It's good to hear that your Leica dealer made things right. It does not sound like you abused your Q2, but merely used it in a reasonable manner in a less than desirable environment - which the camera should have been up to the task of successfully performing in without trouble to begin with. I am in agreement that Leica Wetzlar should have taken care of this; in failing to do so, L/W dropped a seriously big turd in the punch bowl. If this causes even a few prospective buyers to pass on the Q2, L/W will have lost much more revenue than a few hours of repair work would have cost them. Come on, L/W - think things through before you make these decisions! Maybe the best way to proceed is for Q2 owners to not count on the weather sealing to protect the camera from dust entering and damaging the camera? 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