CL out for repair, playing with the old Nikon D90, comparison

[pocholin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had to send the CL for repair, my guess is that it will be electronics controlling the upper wheels and on/off button (if they're separate electronics). Leica has confirmed receipt only thus far. 

So, I had to take dust off the 12 year old Nikon D90, 12 MP with plenty of glass. The best "side-to-side" comparison I can do is pictures of my daughter riding horse. Colors are brighter and skin tone is much better. Despite my best efforts I could not force the skin tones to be the same to the Leica photo. Also, the Nikon lens (100-300mm) is super slow in comparison to the Sigma, they are both stabilized, funny because at the time the Nikon glass seemed fast, what a difference 10 years make! Battery management is MUCH better in the Nikon though...then again, the view finder is not an LCD screen. Other than that, I'm still impressed by how well the Nikon's sharpness and picture quality has held up despite being only 12 MP, it is also a crop sensor...nonetheless, I can't wait to get the Leica back!

This is Leica picture

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!

This is Nikon picture

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I have done a couple of portraits recently, which is not generally what I do. Skin tones from a DNG file were excellent, using a 7 Artisans 55 f1.4. Skin tones from my Nikon D300 were also good, in general I think the Nikon NEF need a little more post processing. I was happy with my D300, but I am happier with the CL. I just got mine back from Leica for an electronic issue, took 4 weeks, but they told me what was going on after about 1. I used my M8 in the interim, should have brought out the D300.

[Advertisement]

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

[pocholin]

I miss the CL so much! These two pictures are okay but they could've been much better!

I like the lens glare effect

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!

 

 

[pocholin]

Well, I'm disappointed with the camera's quality and longevity. Turns out the repair cost comes to $520, ~20% of the original cost of the camera due to an electronic board (quality) and the two upper wheels (longevity) needing replacement, or course by now the camera is out of warranty...so there's that. I mean, one buys into Leica for the colors and the perceived quality...and less than three years later one has to make these types of repairs??? As mentioned before, I've had this Nikon for 12 years, the previous Sony was with me for five years (and sold it to a friend a year ago) and neither camera has had any issues with a lot more usage and abuse. 

My disappointment doesn't come from having to pay that amount, it comes from having to make repairs like this so early in the life of the camera, what's going to happen three years from now?...am I wrong?

[Studienkamera]

15 minutes ago, pocholin said:

My disappointment doesn't come from having to pay that amount, it comes from having to make repairs like this so early in the life of the camera, what's going to happen three years from now?...am I wrong?

No, you are not. I would be disappointed as well. And I am getting slightly worried about my CL, which is of similar age.

[jaapv]

It is an electronic thing. Breakdowns are not related to age, they just happen. You are not really paying the high price for the electronic components; they are fairly universal and you will find the similar bits and pieces out of the same factory in your computer, car or washing machine. 

[pocholin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@jaapv I understand that electronics can fail, does that excuse it for failing? From reading other comments, in this and other sites, it doesn't seem to be an uncommon thing for some electronic to fail. How come the electronics on the 12 y/o DSLR Nikon haven't failed? Should Leica hold their electronics suppliers to a higher standard? Oh well, dust under the carpet now.

I got the camera back a couple of days ago, I do hope for better luck this time around.

[jaapv]

19 hours ago, pocholin said:

How come the electronics on the 12 y/o DSLR Nikon haven't failed

One example is not really a statistical universe. How come I got a flat tyre and my neighbour not in ten years?

[pocholin]

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

One example is not really a statistical universe. How come I got a flat tyre and my neighbour not in ten years?

True but the tire got flat because of an object on your path, not because of a tire defect

I do understand there are many factors at play for an electronic to fail, I'm just sour because it happened to me on a camera I had higher reliability expectations. A struck of back luck can happen anytime to anyone. 

[tom0511]

Maybe one price for the small size and weigjt? I mean its neither weatjerproof and I can not imagine that the wheels for ecample are as stable and as tjose from the SL system. I agree that its disappointing. How many shots have you taken with your cl?

[pocholin]

19 hours ago, tom0511 said:

Maybe one price for the small size and weigjt? I mean its neither weatjerproof and I can not imagine that the wheels for ecample are as stable and as tjose from the SL system. I agree that its disappointing. How many shots have you taken with your cl?

I've taken about 11,000 shots. Many of them were part of multiple frames in a single shot when my daughter rides horses for example.

[Le Chef]

20 hours ago, tom0511 said:

Maybe one price for the small size and weigjt? I mean its neither weatjerproof and I can not imagine that the wheels for ecample are as stable and as tjose from the SL system. I agree that its disappointing. How many shots have you taken with your cl?

Lightness doesn’t have to mean flimsy. If you have good engineers you should be able to build something light and strong. Any engineer can build something that’s heavy and strong. You also have to hope that “continuous improvement” is built into how Leica manufactures camera bodies and lenses. Small improvements that keep refining the product and reduce the probability of failures.

[tom0511]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Le Chef:

Lightness doesn’t have to mean flimsy. If you have good engineers you should be able to build something weight and strong. Any engineer can build something that’s heavy and strong. You also have to hope that “continuous improvement” is built into how Leica manufactures camera bodies and lenses. Small improvements that keep refining the product and reduce the probability of failures.

Yes, I agree it is and should be possible. But if you have two engineer teams. One has the goal to build a sturdy Cl, in small size and low light, and another team to build a camera body, double weight double price (SL for example) which team you expect to "win"?

 

Edited October 23, 2021 by tom0511

[tom0511]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb pocholin:

I've taken about 11,000 shots. Many of them were part of multiple frames in a single shot when my daughter rides horses for example.

Wow, 11.000 is really not much. I fully agree the camera should stand more than this number of shots.

[Le Chef]

2 hours ago, tom0511 said:

Yes, I agree it is and should be possible. But if you have two engineer teams. One has the goal to build a sturdy Cl, in small size and low light, and another team to build a camera body, double weight double price (SL for example) which team you expect to "win"?

 

The CL team: the other team has a lazy brief that any engineer should be able to accomplish without trying. Weight is the enemy of good design and cost control.

[tom0511]

I dont understand this theory. IMO it is usually more difficult to design something in a smaller size or with less weight, and still reach the same reliability and sturdiness.

Smaller design means smaller bearings, smaller axles, smaller toothing, thinner walls of parts, less room for electronics, worse heat transfer for electronics,.... You can compensate with "better" material in some case , but this again means usually increase of cost. 

 

[Le Chef]

5 hours ago, tom0511 said:

I dont understand this theory. IMO it is usually more difficult to design something in a smaller size or with less weight, and still reach the same reliability and sturdiness.

Smaller design means smaller bearings, smaller axles, smaller toothing, thinner walls of parts, less room for electronics, worse heat transfer for electronics,.... You can compensate with "better" material in some case , but this again means usually increase of cost. 

 

You never used “difficulty” as a criteria, just weight and price. So you have a choice: a better designed and lighter piece of equipment, vs a heavier piece of equipment, where both cost exactly the same. Why would you go for the heavier piece of equipment?

[tom0511]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Le Chef:

You never used “difficulty” as a criteria, just weight and price. So you have a choice: a better designed and lighter piece of equipment, vs a heavier piece of equipment, where both cost exactly the same. Why would you go for the heavier piece of equipment?

sorry, can't follow. why would the design of a  lighter product with smaller sensor and lower price get better design/engineering than the heavier, as professional  marketed FF product?

[Le Chef]

3 hours ago, tom0511 said:

sorry, can't follow. why would the design of a  lighter product with smaller sensor and lower price get better design/engineering than the heavier, as professional  marketed FF product?

That's not what you asked for. But smaller and lighter doesn't mean cheaper. Look at chip technology. Look at Ferrari. Or Richard Mille watches. Or MacBook Air. And heavier doesn't mean more expensive or better. Look at iron bedsteads.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[tom0511]

As far as I I remember the CL is priced lower than the SL-series bodies. But anyways. I wear a titan Sinn watch and of course I dont think it is worse engineered than the steel version.