M10M gate coming?

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 minutes ago, Gobert said:

As I’ve written before in this topic: I pushed LR to the extremes with several pictures, but I cannot reproduce it.

Then it’s not an issue for your sensor; that’s all you can conclude from that.

[Advertisement]

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

[RMF]

29 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

Leica Miami has asked Leica Germany and Leica USA for a response with a link to this thread. Maybe this will be a more official response than what jplomley received and reported earlier.

Wonderful, thanks for letting us know! Leica Miami is A+ and I’m looking forward to hearing Leica’s PR and tech response to the observed issues. 
//@ Leica I would be happy to provide samples from my camera as my M10m has experienced the issue on at least one occasion. 

[Gobert]

18 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

Then it’s not an issue for your sensor; that’s all you can conclude from that.

That was the conclusion you replied on.

[hdmesa]

3 minutes ago, Gobert said:

That was the conclusion you replied on.

I replied to this:

Quote

I sincerely believe that the issues are incidents, which doesn’t mean that Leica hasn’t to solve them.

Maybe I misread because it looks like you have some strange grammar in that sentence. I read it as "Leica doesn't have to solve the issue."

[Gobert]

51 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

What does that even mean and how does what you believe have anything to do with this? I can reproduce this issue at-will. It shows up on an any even-tone background with added contrast, sometimes being visible with no adjustments.

As I’ve written before in this topic: I pushed LR to the extremes with several pictures, but I cannot reproduce it.

 

5 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

I replied to this:

Maybe I misread because it looks like you have some strange grammar in that sentence. I read it as "Leica doesn't have to solve the issue."

sorry for misunderstanding. Of course they have to fix the issue.

As it is not in all cameras, they should be able to fix it.

[hdmesa]

13 minutes ago, Gobert said:

As I’ve written before in this topic: I pushed LR to the extremes with several pictures, but I cannot reproduce it.

 

sorry for misunderstanding. Of course they have to fix the issue.

As it is not in all cameras, they should be able to fix it.

Thanks, sounds like we're on the same page.

Since you and others can't reproduce the issue, that probably rules out a firmware fix and points to a problem with consistency in the production of the sensor. It could also be that all of them made after a certain date have the issue. I think Lloyd Chambers got his sample in the last year, and mine is from April of this year, so it could be a range of cameras affected. We'll have to see what Leica reports back.

[Gobert]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a Leitz Wetzlar from September or so. Most of the times combined with APO 50 or Summilux 50

Edited June 18, 2021 by Gobert

[hdmesa]

2 minutes ago, Gobert said:

I have a Leitz Wetzlar from September or so. Most of the times combined with APO 50 or Summilux 50

Lloyd's tests were in Dec. 2020, so the issue could have started after yours was produced; or it could be a random issue of quality control or manufacturing tolerances.

Lloyd used the 24 Elmar, ZM 35, and probably others. I've only tried using the Summilux 50 BC and CV 50 APO so far. Doesn't seem like the lenses used make any difference, though.

[Gobert]

I’ll do some more testing with different lenses.

[jplomley]

1 hour ago, hdmesa said:

Thanks, sounds like we're on the same page.

Since you and others can't reproduce the issue, that probably rules out a firmware fix and points to a problem with consistency in the production of the sensor. It could also be that all of them made after a certain date have the issue. I think Lloyd Chambers got his sample in the last year, and mine is from April of this year, so it could be a range of cameras affected. We'll have to see what Leica reports back.

Mine was manufactured in July 2020. I see the issues with the 24 Elmar, 35 Lux FLE and 50 Lux Asph. Problem has nothing to do with the lenses. 

Edited June 18, 2021 by jplomley

[jplomley]

2 hours ago, hdmesa said:

Leica Miami has asked Leica Germany and Leica USA for a response with a link to this thread. Maybe this will be a more official response than what jplomley received and reported earlier.

Excellent.

My dealer (Camtec Photo in Montreal) also reached out to Leica USA with a link to this thread, and then 3 weeks later I was requested to send files to Germany. I did. Only one of the three issues were addressed. When I asked about the other two issues, I did not even receive a response. $30K spent on Leica camera bodies in the last year alone (don't want to know how much in the last 25 years) clearly does not warrant a response. Must be a higher ceiling for this kind of service. I hope Leica Miami as a higher volume dealer with more marketing visibility has better luck. I shall continue to watch this thread with eager anticipation of a positive outcome.

 

   

[RMF]

Mine was manufactured on Dec 20, 2019.  What seems interesting, or at least an item of note is that the issue does not make its self apparent consistently with my particular camera under the similar conditions; could It be temperature related, was it the first shot after turning ‘on’, does it matter how much under/over exposed, ISO, etc….   I’ve only experienced the issue once when shooting a blank wall with soft graduated light hitting it, but I can’t duplicate the issue consistently. @Leica- I’d like to file a bug in your ADO database for your engineers to investigate, and your QA teams to thoroughly test.. 🙂 

Edited June 18, 2021 by RMF

[jplomley]

1 hour ago, RMF said:

Mine was manufactured on Dec 20, 2019.  What seems interesting, or at least an item of note is that the issue does not make its self apparent consistently with my particular camera under the similar conditions; could It be temperature related, was it the first shot after turning ‘on’, does it matter how much under/over exposed, ISO, etc….   I’ve only experienced the issue once when shooting a blank wall with soft graduated light hitting it, but I can’t duplicate the issue consistently. @Leica- I’d like to file a bug in your ADO database for your engineers to investigate, and your QA teams to thoroughly test.. 🙂 

My feeling is that with the folks from Leica Miami now involved with this, it will go straight to the product manager instead of customer service. The latter was simply useless and uninspiring, showing no lack of concern whatsoever.  With the product manager involved, I would expect a solution in rather short order. Leica cannot afford another M8 scandal.

[Gobert]

2 minutes ago, jplomley said:

My feeling is that with the folks from Leica Miami now involved with this, it will go straight to the product manager instead of customer service. The latter was simply useless and uninspiring, showing no lack of concern whatsoever.  With the product manager involved, I would expect a solution in rather short order. Leica cannot afford another M8 scandal.

M9 you mean?

[jplomley]

2 minutes ago, Gobert said:

M9 you mean?

M8 and the requirement for IR filters post-shipment, which remarkably none of the reviewers bothered to mention in their evaluations. But yes, you are correct, the sensor corrosion issue with the M9/M9M. I'd forgotten all about that.  

[Gobert]

OK. In the M8 area I was working with Nikons and I never heard about M8 scandal.  Now it is more clear.

[Jeff S]

37 minutes ago, jplomley said:

M8 and the requirement for IR filters post-shipment, which remarkably none of the reviewers bothered to mention in their evaluations. But yes, you are correct, the sensor corrosion issue with the M9/M9M. I'd forgotten all about that.  

And the M8 yellow stain/screen issues, which ultimately led to a policy statement.  Then the uproar regarding M9 sensor corrosion led to an explanation, apology and policy statement, including a personal forum response from Stefan Daniel....

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/244082-leica-upgrade-program-for-m9-corrosion-of-sensor/

Given the M customer base and product positioning, Leica cannot afford to remain silent, provided the issue is broad enough.  In this instance, given the small M10M niche, and the relative newness of the issue, Leica Miami could help jump start the response.

S users aren't so fortunate. Leica still hasn't provided an explanation regarding the causes and prevalence of the S lens motor failures, although they at least eventually came up with a policy statement following much discussion and frustration from forum members.  

Jeff

 

[BrianS]

19 hours ago, hdmesa said:

Anything that affects contrast will affect the visibility of the difference between the halves.

I can shoot the light gray ceiling in my house and see it.

You can see the difference, but if you want to measure the difference you need to shoot a uniform target and bracket across the dynamic range of the camera. If the difference between the left/right half of the image is linear, it means that the camera can be fixed by Leica properly calibrating it. If the difference is not linear, has some off component to it- then difficult to fix. If the calibration depends on the ISO that the image is shot at, then more than one set of coefficients needs to be used in the calibration. I wonder if the Leica firmware handles those conditions.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hdmesa]

17 minutes ago, BrianS said:

You can see the difference, but if you want to measure the difference you need to shoot a uniform target and bracket across the dynamic range of the camera. If the difference between the left/right half of the image is linear, it means that the camera can be fixed by Leica properly calibrating it. If the difference is not linear, has some off component to it- then difficult to fix. If the calibration depends on the ISO that the image is shot at, then more than one set of coefficients needs to be used in the calibration. I wonder if the Leica firmware handles those conditions.

I'm not sure how you could calculate the difference between the frames halves since the exposure defect starts at the top center but is gone before it gets to the center of the frame. I suppose you could measure a single pixel at the top between all frames, but given the fact that the defect is on a vertical gradient, I'd be at a loss as to how to proceed.

I shipped mine back to Leica Miami this afternoon for a credit toward a 28 Lux-M, so I can't do any further testing.

[jplomley]

1 hour ago, hdmesa said:

I'm not sure how you could calculate the difference between the frames halves since the exposure defect starts at the top center but is gone before it gets to the center of the frame. I suppose you could measure a single pixel at the top between all frames, but given the fact that the defect is on a vertical gradient, I'd be at a loss as to how to proceed.

I shipped mine back to Leica Miami this afternoon for a credit toward a 28 Lux-M, so I can't do any further testing.

Probably the best thing to do. I'm not convinced there is an easy fix, its a fundamentally flawed product. I've had mine a bit too long, so will just sell it and take the hit.