Premature wear on camera body

[Herr Barnack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My approach will probably be met with scorn form the "no bag" contingent, but all the above accounts of premature wear and tear to the exterior finish of  M and Q cameras is why I carry my cameras in a small bag.

Ir seems to me that the lion's share of scratches/dings/ gouges/scrapes/dents, etc. happen when the camera is being worn rather than when it is actually being used.  Half cases can provide some protection, but not as much as a camera bag or small day bag can.  Besides, I don't really care for people at the grocery store, gas station, liquor store, etc. to see that I am carrying a costly M camera.

My most frequently used bags are my Think Tank Photo Retrospective 7  V2.0, my Patagonia Black Hole Mini Messenger 12L (now discontinued - massive mistake on Patagonia's part IMHO), and my Filson Small Rugged Twill Field Bag (still in production). 

The result of carrying in a bag is that my now 5 year, 5 month old M-P 240 Safari is still in near mint condition with no scratches, gouges or brassing, and its condition is not due to being seldom used.  Brassing and wear are not issues in my mind; they are neither desirable or to be avoided.  Premature, unnecessary and avoidable cosmetic damage and wear and tear are to be avoided; JMHO. 

A smallish field bag such as the Filson Small Rugged Twill Field Bag is not padded but is made of very thick, heavy material and does provide good protection for one M camera with an attached lens and a second lens in a Zing neoprene pouch.  This bag is not padded, so I cut a 1" thick base pad out of a gardener's kneeling pad I got at Lowe's,  This provides impact protection in case the bag and camera are accidentally dropped.  The nice thing about this bag - and my Patagonia Black Hole Mini Messenger - is that neither looks like a camera bag; they look like a million other bags that people carry these days, with  no indication of the value of the bag's contents.

This is my way of carrying my costly M camera and lens on a day to day basis; it may not be the answer for everyone, but it works for me.  I would suggest giving it a try.

Edited September 4, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[pleasing eye]

Yes, we as human beings were made with two hands, 10 fingers with a fingernail at the end of each finger.  So what's the point here?  Should one remove a fingernail no matter what the size or shape because of a so called "leather coating" that does not hold up to the rigors of its users?  In over 45 years of photography experience I have never paid the price of a Leica, and have never had an issue such as this.  

 

As far as the arguement that pertains to a leather bag, I wear my camera.  However, this abrasion is not from how the camera is carried, but the daily operation of the system with the utilization of hands and fingers.  Obviously the skin over the camera body was not made to withstand daily operation with two hands, 10 appendages and the finger nail at the end of each finger.  

 

Edited September 5, 2020 by pleasing eye

[pleasing eye]

I always thought a fingernail was at the tip of each finger............

[jake-leica]

The only thing more cool than a high priced luxury item (in my eyes anyway), a high priced luxury item that looks like it's really been used and enjoyed.

I used to be part of a Rolex forum - left and never went back because all the endless whining about micro scratches and who would dare to wear their watch in bed, finally got old.  

Now on the other hand if something breaks and Leica says, "oh we don't actually fix that" ....... 🤔 

[pleasing eye]

In reply to aliksv's statement:  "These to me look like nail scratches rather than marks from the tip of a finger."  To my dear Leica Colleague and fellow photographer:  The fingernail is at the  very end of each tip of a finger.  

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!

[alksv]

3 hours ago, pleasing eye said:

In reply to aliksv's statement:  "These to me look like nail scratches rather than marks from the tip of a finger."  To my dear Leica Colleague and fellow photographer:  The fingernail is at the  very end of each tip of a finger.  

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!

I never intended my comment to be condescending in any way and I'm not sure why it resulted in such a reaction. I only pointed out that it's quite normal in my opinion that such surfaces tend to scratch when in contact with something as sharp and dense as a keratinous plate (rather than soft tissue), it's hardly a surprise. I don't see how what you are encountering is the result of low QC on Leica's part. And I don't think we need to debate about anatomy.

[pleasing eye]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There should be no debate here.  Since fingers have fingernails the camera body should be impervious to situations that result in considerable wear on the “skin” of the camera body.  Each hand is distinct as well as the grip and way a camera is held during the many opportunities of capturing images.  My point is that this should never happen on a five thousand dollar camera.  

I’ve had Nikon, Bronica, Olympus and Ricoh systems and NEVER have I encountered a situation like this.  And again I reiterate that there is obviously a flaw in the material that covers the camera body.  I’’m sure that I am not the only one who has encountered this, neither will I be the last.  

 

[pleasing eye]

 

 

 

 

 

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!

The image to me is not like a nice brasing like quality on a metal camera body.  This “skin” which I believe is a relatively new addition to the Leica line for the Q-Q2 is obviously not in any way attractive to me.   It should be replaced by Leica with a more durable material.  I mean after all no product is perfect and the customer is in most cases helpful with feedback in order to make a more improved product.

[nicci78]

2 possibilities : 

- your leatherette is faulty. Because this type of leatherette is really strong. It is used on Q, SL, Q2 and SL2. And you are the first one, of my knowledge, reporting such issue. 
- or like Steve Jobs would have said : you are holding it wrong. You may hold the Q2 in a very unique way. Putting the leatherette under unusual pressure : your nail. Hence the wear. 
 

It is quite easy to replace the leatherette. Ask for Leica. Or just pick another compatible one of your liking. 

[jaapv]

Agree, this does not look like the wear on earlier Leica cameras. It is obviously a thin layer on a fiber base, unlike previous cameras with more solid coverings. If Leica will not replace it - after all, wear is never covered by guaranty- you could research the usual providers of quality leather camera covers.I seem to remember that Camera Leather has a recovering service besides providing rather nice skins. 

[pgk]

On 11/9/2019 at 11:58 PM, bourne said:

Here is a photo showing the wear on my camera. 

Its simply been left on the auto brassing setting too long.

[vedivv]

The skin looks pretty bad.  I know people who abused Q over the years, but never seen this kind of marks.

Leica Customer Care since last year started to offer customized leather cover for $220 plus shipping.  The current cover looks pretty strong, but leather definitely age better over the years.  Here is the link:

https://us.leica-camera.com/Service-Support/Services/Leica-Individualisation

I carefully examined my Q2 after the initial post, and found paint loss in numerous areas.  But unless resale value is concerned, the scratches and wear marks add character.

[pleasing eye]

Yes typical wear adds character on any other area but the leatherette.

As far as Steve Jobs is concerned, I fail to follow any reasoning in that statement about holding it wrong???

I should not have to purchase any kind of additional skin for this camera, which I love by the way,  just give me a camera

that holds up without abrasion with everyday usage like all my others, and replace this undoubtedly defective material.

[pleasing eye]

Yes typical wear adds character on any other area but the leatherette.

As far as Steve Jobs is concerned, I fail to follow any reasoning in that statement about holding it wrong???

I should not have to purchase any kind of additional skin for this camera, which I love by the way,  just give me a camera

that holds up without abrasion with everyday usage like all my others, and replace this undoubtedly defective material.

Edited September 6, 2020 by pleasing eye
Posted in error by accident

[Herr Barnack]

After reading this thread and studying the photos again, a defect in the leatherette seems to be the most likely scenario.  If Leica calls it normal wear and declines to replace the leatherette under warranty, I would have it recovered with leather rather than paying for another leatherette covering.

Edited September 6, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[Leica Guy]

Looks to me that your camera has character from lots of use. It’s easy enough to re-skin the camera. Numerous really good sources including Arte de mano. You could do that or else install a half-case on it. In 5 years now of a Q and Q2 I’ve not experienced what you are with the abrasion. Good luck. 

[vedivv]

7 hours ago, pleasing eye said:

Yes typical wear adds character on any other area but the leatherette.

As far as Steve Jobs is concerned, I fail to follow any reasoning in that statement about holding it wrong???

I should not have to purchase any kind of additional skin for this camera, which I love by the way,  just give me a camera

that holds up without abrasion with everyday usage like all my others, and replace this undoubtedly defective material.

On Leica's part, I do think "patina" and aging should have been a consideration.  Scratch marks can add to characters, as long as it does not look like something is broken.

Not sure why the Steve Jobs comments.  If you run a company, Steve Jobs' reality distortion field and PR management could be a great skill for you.  I don't see as a customer we want to be manipulated on product quality.  For the premium that we are paying for Leica, or other luxury goods, we are entitled premium product. 

Should we all make a declaration that Leica users are a cult, and that we will buy defend Leica products, even when they are defective?

The reality is that Leica and its distributors have been very generous in addressing these issues, and they would never make the Steve Jobs comment.

Every now and then, when people raise concern about Leica camera quality, we see defensive and sometimes insulting replies.  As much as we love Leica, attacking victim of a defective product seems mean.