Non-destructively remove the red dot

[decltype]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all,

I am searching for a way to (non-destructively) remove the red dot. Some people who did the vertical RF adjustment said it was a 5 minute operation, but omitted the actual details of removing the dot. 

I tried to use a hairdryer to loosen the adhesive, then using toothpicks to apply rotational force. I am able to easily rotate it 360 degrees, but it's just not coming out of its socket. 

Any and all advice appreciated!

[jaapv]

If you can rotate it, you can simply lift it off. It is nothing more than a bit of adhesive... there is nothing like a socket, it is just a badge stuck on.

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest]

Leica seem to have used significantly more adhesive to keep the M10’s red dot stuck on, and it’s a pain to remove. It’s not easy to rotate, and lift off compared to some earlier M models (and also compared to the Q and CL). When you do eventually remove the dot, you will find a nub of adhesive that was blocking the adjustment access hole behind the red dot. Once rotated a few times, the dot can be lifted off by carefully using a thin blade like a scalpel (hopefully without scratching the body!). You will probably be left with a blob of adhesive on the back of the dot, and I’d be wary about re-using it.

As there’s an adjustment hole behind the red dot, perhaps the generous helping of adhesive is to comply with IP53 dust and spray resistance standards? Just conjecture on my part though.

Replacement red/black dots (available via eBay etc) don’t have as much adhesive as the M10’s original red dot in my experience so maybe there’s a small risk involved in replacing it, and the sealing is compromised.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Guest

[gotium]

I tried, quite hard, and failed

[anickpick]

Use the hairdryer for another 30 seconds.

It should come off eventually.

 

 

[rramesh]

Once you remove it, you may have a hard time reusing it. Why not just cover it with some round tape?

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, rramesh said:

Once you remove it, you may have a hard time reusing it. Why not just cover it with some round tape?

Tough to adjust the RF that way, as his initial post suggests.  I haven’t had any issue removing or preserving red dot on two earlier models and replacing with a preferred black logo from DAG, although I decided to leave the red dot alone on my silver M10.  Red dots are also easy and cheap to replace. Strictly personal aesthetic preference for me.

Jeff

 

Edited April 27, 2019 by Jeff S

[Rick in CO]

Instead of a hair dryer, place the camera with the red dot centered under a lamp with a heat emitting bulb for about half an hour.

Don't bake the camera by letting it get too hot, use some caution.

This will evenly soften the glue allowing you to twist the dot free.  

Use a toothpick to get under the dot and lift it off - don't use anything metal!

I have replaced the red dot on my M9, M240, M10 with the black dot using this method.

Good luck!

[fotografr]

When did the once highly regarded Leica red dot fall out of fashion? I seem to have missed it. If the idea is to disguise the camera, I'm pretty certain anyone who recognizes the red dot will know a Leica with or without one.

Edited April 27, 2019 by fotografr

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, fotografr said:

When did the once highly regarded Leica red dot fall out of fashion? I seem to have missed it. If the idea is to disguise the camera, I'm pretty certain anyone who recognizes the red dot will know a Leica with or without one.

It’s been frequently discussed here since I joined 10 years ago, and likely before that...

DAG has been stocking black logos for most all Ms (as Leica Camera doesn’t provide them given trademark issues... at least not since the black M8.2 came stock with a block dot, apparently without Leica Camera’s authorization from Leica Microsystems, which owns the trademark/logo.  The silver M8.2 came with a red dot.)

Discussions regarding other ways to hide or change the red dot (tape, etc) also have been common.  Typically these end up with debates over whether discretion is somehow better achieved.  I’ve never thought so, instead believing that it’s the photographer’s approach and demeanor, not the camera (huge zooms or large format gear, etc, excepted) that determines discretion. I occasionally  prefer black logos just based on personal taste, nothing more. Lately I haven’t bothered.

Leica Camera is certainly well aware of diverse user preferences, or else the P versions and special edition Ms, often without any dot (and screw replacement like some older Ms) wouldn’t be so popular. And Leica has been doing special editions for decades.

Jeff

Edited April 27, 2019 by Jeff S

[Stuart Richardson]

1 hour ago, fotografr said:

When did the once highly regarded Leica red dot fall out of fashion? I seem to have missed it. If the idea is to disguise the camera, I'm pretty certain anyone who recognizes the red dot will know a Leica with or without one.

I have no problem with the aesthetics of the dot, I just prefer taping over the logos on all of my cameras...at least when they are prominent. I find that they are distracting, as the person is reading a logo instead of looking at you. Additionally, people who know something about photography but not too much will recognized brands and ask about them etc etc. I just find the more discreet the logos are, the more people ignore the camera, which is what I would like them to do. I also think you might be surprised how many people who know about "Leica" but who would not recognize one. I know plenty of people, particularly women, who have clearly heard of cars like Ferraris and Maseratis, but would most likely not be able to identify one as anything other than a fancy car.

[pico]

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!

[fotografr]

3 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I have no problem with the aesthetics of the dot, I just prefer taping over the logos on all of my cameras...at least when they are prominent. I find that they are distracting, as the person is reading a logo instead of looking at you. Additionally, people who know something about photography but not too much will recognized brands and ask about them etc etc. I just find the more discreet the logos are, the more people ignore the camera, which is what I would like them to do.

I'm curious how you get someone to ignore a camera that is up to your eye and pointed at them.  In 40 years of photographing people, that's a trick I've not learned. My experience has been that people don't care or even notice what kind of camera is pointed at them. They only care that it is pointed at them. The only people I've encountered who recognize the red dot as the mark of a Leica are other photographers. The vast majority of people who ask me about the cool looking camera slung over my shoulder have never heard of Leica.

[Stuart Richardson]

It is not about them ignoring the camera completely, more about minimizing the distractions. If you pull something up to your face and it has bright white text or a red dot, the eye is drawn to it, where if you are just holding a nondescript black box, people are more likely to look at you. Text is like a shiny object to the eye...it is often drawn to it. Anyway, it is just something I have felt. In general, I don't want questions or comments on my gear, and I have found that this helps minimize them. 

A perfect example would be the Leica S. When it is untaped it says Leica across the prism and has the red dot. I have had people ask, "oh, what is that? A Leica SLR? Is it digital? Oh, it must be expensive. How much is it? Oh wow, why would you pay so much? It must be 100mp..........no?" And down the rabbit hole we go. I have noticed that by covering the logo I get almost no questions...it is just a big non-descript SLR. 

Edited April 28, 2019 by Stuart Richardson

[jaapv]

But this dot-removal thread is about adjusting the RF...

[Stuart Richardson]

Yes, it was. I was just reacting to fotografr's comment.

 

[fotografr]

I was reacting to comments about removing all words and logos that identify the camera. The discussion most definitely strayed from how to access an adjustment. I don't really care what anyone does to change the appearance of their own cameras. I was just curious about the logic.

I think it's the nature of internet threads like this to meander and evolve and I don't see any problem with that.

 

Edited April 28, 2019 by fotografr

[derleicaman]

The red dot thing goes back to the M4-2, M4-P and then the M6 days. Tom Abrahamsson would always tape over the red dot, and following Tom's lead, I would too. We felt it just stood out like a sore thumb and called too much attention to the camera. Back in those days, we not only had the red dot on the front of the camera, but also the Leica name and model numbers in white. Tom would tape his over, I filled in my lettering with dark grey paint.

When I was speccing out the Black Paint LHSA camera, I asked for a black Leica dot for the front of the camera, thinking this was an elegant solution and to make things blend with the black paint finish. Also, I had specified no Leica or model number on the front of the camera, but the Leica script back on the top plate where it belonged with the classic Leica script. I had the prototype with me at a PMA show and was discussing it with the CEO of Leica at the time. He pointed to the black dot and said' "Bill there is something wrong here". I responded, no, I had asked to have the black dot instead of the red one. He said OK, and that's the way the limited run was made, with the black dot.

When the M8.2 came out, someone at Leica Micro Systems objected. They control the Leica logo and license it to Leica Camera. Theirs is black, Camera's is red. So that was the end of the "official" black dot. True story. 

[Rick in CO]

On 4/27/2019 at 4:28 PM, fotografr said:

When did the once highly regarded Leica red dot fall out of fashion? I seem to have missed it. If the idea is to disguise the camera, I'm pretty certain anyone who recognizes the red dot will know a Leica with or without one.

Just trying to help out.  It's nice to have choices, for me a personal preference and in my experience, it does make the camera less conspicuous.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Rick in CO]

1 hour ago, derleicaman said:

The red dot thing goes back to the M4-2, M4-P and then the M6 days. Tom Abrahamsson would always tape over the red dot, and following Tom's lead, I would too. We felt it just stood out like a sore thumb and called too much attention to the camera. Back in those days, we not only had the red dot on the front of the camera, but also the Leica name and model numbers in white. Tom would tape his over, I filled in my lettering with dark grey paint.

When I was speccing out the Black Paint LHSA camera, I asked for a black Leica dot for the front of the camera, thinking this was an elegant solution and to make things blend with the black paint finish. Also, I had specified no Leica or model number on the front of the camera, but the Leica script back on the top plate where it belonged with the classic Leica script. I had the prototype with me at a PMA show and was discussing it with the CEO of Leica at the time. He pointed to the black dot and said' "Bill there is something wrong here". I responded, no, I had asked to have the black dot instead of the red one. He said OK, and that's the way the limited run was made, with the black dot.

When the M8.2 came out, someone at Leica Micro Systems objected. They control the Leica logo and license it to Leica Camera. Theirs is black, Camera's is red. So that was the end of the "official" black dot. True story. 

Thanks for the interesting story!  I wondered where the black dots came from.  Explains why, in one of the previous posts on this subject, someone told about sending their black dot camera to Leica for service and it was returned with a red dot!