Brand new MP/M-A/M6 film scratches [Merged]

[Mute-on]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Mooshoepork said:

Maybe buy used from a time when Leica knew how to make cameras? Plenty of CLA’d M6s floating around. 

An entirely sensible suggestion. 
 

Leica made its name producing film cameras, and created a highly experienced, and expert workforce that knew the products, and how to perfect them. Now these people are retired, and those making the film cameras have to be trained to do so, without the benefit of a continuum of knowledge from decades of experience. 
 

I perfectly understand the desire to have a new production Leica film M, on the assumption that it represents the most refined and perfected iteration of the film cameras they have been producing for many decades, but the reality is that era is over.
 

My personal opinion is that it ended shortly after the M8 was launched. However in some ways, the M2 / M3 era was the peak of Film M production (although it is claimed the M4 was the last of the adjust-to-fit production Leicas - in my experience it is not quite up to the standard of the M2). 

It would be nice to believe that Leica can recapture its film camera heyday, and perhaps it will, but it seems there is any awfully long way to go.

If I am overwhelmed by the desire for more film Leica M bodies, I won’t be looking at anything after the original M4. Regardless, as with everything mechanical, there are compromises and risks of failure. 

[Steve Ricoh]

9 hours ago, Mikep996 said:

The following is an observation so if you are hoping for something useful or helpful, the old movie quote is appropriate..."Move along, there is nothing to see here..." 😉

Every product, from screwdrivers to airplanes, has a failure rate that is considered acceptable by manufacturers and, if appropriate, government regulations.  As an example, it may come as a surprise but there is an acceptable "failure rate" in the air traffic control system.  Yep, if you are assuming that the number of acceptable collisions is zero, you would be wrong.  😱   

But don't worry, that particular rate is EXTREMELY low.   For aircraft flying across the North Atlantic the "acceptable failure rate" calculates to one air traffic control-caused collision every 150 years!  (No, I'm not making this up or basing it on some internet pundit's article. I spent 33 years in that particular field of aviation and for the last 10 years was part of the US delegation to an annual international meeting in which the specific collision risk figures/calculations were part of the agenda/discussion).  

    Now that we have reminded ourselves that everything can fail, let's shift from the vanishingly low chances of falling out of the sky over the ocean to the important topic of M6 film scratching.🤔

The 'failure rate' for the new M6 is difficult for us to determine because we have no idea how many new M6's have been produced so far AND how many of them are scratching film or are otherwise defective.  From research I have found that most consumer products seem to have an acceptable failure rate of 2% for major problems that make the item unusable and around 4% for other issues that may be annoying but still allow the product to function correctly. 

I would expect that returned products in the 2% category would be a higher priority for repair than one in the 4% category.  IMO an M6 with a cosmetic issue would fit in the 4% but scratching film SHOULD (IMO) make it unusable, placing it in the 2% category.  However, someone in marketing or accounting could argue that the film-scratcher still "functions correctly" so they might direct it to the slower 4% queue for repair.  OTOH, at Leica there may be only one queue and all repairs, regardless of 'severity' are simply taken in the order they arrive.  IOW, no triage-like evaluation.

Leica, not being all that large compared to say, Nikon, I would assume their repair capability is considerably less.  Huss noted his Nikon F6's five day turn-around where Leica seems to use a similar number but in weeks instead of days!  😳

Hmm...maybe if film had a kevlar base...🤣

 

 

 

 

 

 

If memory serves me correctly, but it’s some time back, death for manned aircraft has an acceptance level of 1 in 10 ^7 flying hours.

Edited December 30, 2022 by Steve Ricoh

[lmans]

1 hour ago, Huss said:

No woes, why would I want your suggestion when I have perfectly working M3, MP, M-A, M5, M7?
 

but i do notice you completely ignored my question.  Why on earth is the wait for Leica repair so long?

I can’t answer that Huss…. Frankly it makes no sense🥲
 

You sent to Germany?

wasn’t Leica America ‘moving’ /changing buildings ? Not sure if move completed or still in process but perhaps a backlog of basic repairs and bled over to Europe?

Hard to believe only one person in repair  dept. Maybe only one person assigned to M6’s?

Either way…. Any way… yes you got screwed. Good luck

Edited December 31, 2022 by lmans

[Mikep996]

"Leica made its name producing film cameras, and created a highly experienced, and expert workforce that knew the products, and how to perfect them. Now these people are retired, and those making the film cameras have to be trained to do so, without the benefit of a continuum of knowledge from decades of experience. "

I would agree with that statement if Nikon started producing film cameras but Leica has been producing film cameras all along so it seems to me that they DO have an ongoing continuum of knowledge about making film cameras.  

 

Edited December 30, 2022 by Mikep996

[wattsy]

9 hours ago, lmans said:

Hard to believe only one person in repair  dept. Maybe only one person assigned to M6’s?

One person repairing film cameras, not one person in the whole repair 'department'. You can believe what you like but that is what the Leica repair people told me in 2016. I didn't complain, I considered the estimated service time of a month or two okay in the circumstances and I was given a loaner camera to use so I wasn't particularly disadvantaged.

[wattsy]

9 hours ago, Mikep996 said:

Leica has been producing film cameras all along so it seems to me that they DO have an ongoing continuum of knowledge about making film cameras.

You would imagine so but we don't know for certain that there has been an uninterrupted "continuum of knowledge". During the last 15 years, film camera manufacture at Leica will have dwindled to historically low production numbers and then started to ramp up again after the introduction of the M-A. We don't know whether, in that time, Leica have had periods within which they have had problems retaining experienced staff and/or introducing newly trained employees.

[Huss]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, wattsy said:

You would imagine so but we don't know for certain that there has been an uninterrupted "continuum of knowledge". During the last 15 years, film camera manufacture at Leica will have dwindled to historically low production numbers and then started to ramp up again after the introduction of the M-A. We don't know whether, in that time, Leica have had periods within which they have had problems retaining experienced staff and/or introducing newly trained employees.

If Leica had an issue with experienced staff, they should have paused production until the quality came back on line.  Instead of selling defective product.

But.. I don’t think it is an assembly issue, I think it is a parts supplier issue but Leica still should be checking the parts used to make sure they are acceptable.  For example, the new Ford Bronco had a leaking roof.  An outside supplier provided those roof panels.  Once that came to light, they stopped delivery until those roofs were replaced.   Leica has had batches of scratching cameras.  They should be doing the same thing, but I think they don’t because the avg consumer hardly ever uses the camera and doesnt pay attention to the results.  They just want a shiny new Leica.

Edited December 31, 2022 by Huss

[lmans]

32 minutes ago, Huss said:

 the avg consumer hardly ever uses the camera and doesnt pay attention to the results.  They just want a shiny new Leica.

This….. to me is pretty realistic. This is more true of film cameras than digital as film looks enticing to many but then can’t either figure it out, or tire of film, or can’t focus or exposure etc…  BUT… the camera sure looks good on the shelf:)

[Huss]

37 minutes ago, lmans said:

This….. to me is pretty realistic. This is more true of film cameras than digital as film looks enticing to many but then can’t either figure it out, or tire of film, or can’t focus or exposure etc…  BUT… the camera sure looks good on the shelf:)

Yeah, I think the avg user - no matter the brand - is just happy to get something!  Not realizing how good it could be.  But for many lower quality results are a success because those flaws - scratches, dust, murky exposure, poor focus - is the attraction after their technically perfect Iphone pics!  It's what identifies the images to them as film images.

[lmans]

16 minutes ago, Huss said:

Yeah, I think the avg user - no matter the brand - is just happy to get something!  Not realizing how good it could be.  But for many lower quality results are a success because those flaws - scratches, dust, murky exposure, poor focus - is the attraction after their technically perfect Iphone pics!  It's what identifies the images to them as film images.

Well I was just out shooting with my Barnacks and got all u mentioned and love it:)!!

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!

[Mikep996]

It's interesting that many of us that grew up in the film era worked hard to ELIMINATE grain and other flaws from prints.   Nobody wanted grain unless it was a specific "artistic" thing.  There was film and developers that essentially made grain invisible in a print viewed from a normal viewing distance.  Digital essentially eliminated grain which most of us saw as a good thing.  Now,  people want grainy/flawed images so they "look like film," even though that wasn't typical of decent film images/prints.

Strange...🤔

Edited December 31, 2022 by Mikep996

[Tom434]

I think this topic is escalating based on a very limited basis of information: Yes, there is a single M6 out there, which scratches film. Is this really an indicator for untrained staff, missing quality control or unreliable suppliers?! My M6 2022 works flawlessly, looks better than ever and is impressing by unquestionable quality. Conclusions?

 

 

Edited January 1, 2023 by Tom434

[Huss]

24 minutes ago, Tom434 said:

I think this topic is escalating based on a very limited basis of information: Yes, there is a single M6 out there, which scratches film. Is this really an indicator for untrained staff, missing quality control or unreliable suppliers?! My M6 2022 works flawlessly, looks better than ever and is impressing by unquestionable quality. Conclusions?

 

 

Please post pics taken with your new M6!  Glad you have a flawless one, I am waiting on mine to be returned in similar shape.

 

p.s. so keeping score from what I know here - 3 new M6 that scratch film, one (yours) that does not.

Anyone else on l-camera have a new 2022 M6?  And is using it....

Edited January 1, 2023 by Huss

[Matlock]

7 hours ago, Huss said:

p.s. so keeping score from what I know here - 3 new M6 that scratch film, one (yours) that does not.

 

Plus the 2 that I told you about, that are fine.

[Huss]

9 hours ago, Matlock said:

Plus the 2 that I told you about, that are fine.

3 good, 3 bad.

[LocalHero1953]

3 minutes ago, Huss said:

3 good, 3 bad.

In a couple of years we might even achieve a statistically significant sample.

[Huss]

1 minute ago, LocalHero1953 said:

In a couple of years we might even achieve a statistically significant sample.

You work with the data you have.  In a couple of years you could say the same thing, and then add other arguments like ‘not everyone reports’ ‘all the good ones are not being reported’ etc etc

But what we have here is a sampling from this forum. It would be great if everyone who has a 2022 M6 reports.

Currently I use a Leica R9, 1f, Md-a, M3, M5, M-A, MP, M7 (2), M10r and hopefully soon again M6.  So it is obvious that I am in deep with Leica.

But unlike some here, I am not going to gloss over real issues that exist because that is not helpful to anyone.  I get it though, no matter the brand there are always those who defend the brand no matter what.

The thing with Leica that makes it different is that they pack that little quality check card claiming how everything has been checked multiple times.  When it is obvious that that is just lip service.  Defects happen, but when you have, apparently, a system in place to check for quality which misses such an obvious and basic thing, well….

[LocalHero1953]

10 minutes ago, Huss said:

You work with the data you have.  In a couple of years you could say the same thing, and then add other arguments like ‘not everyone reports’ ‘all the good ones are not being reported’ etc etc

But what we have here is a sampling from this forum. It would be great if everyone who has a 2022 M6 reports.

Currently I use a Leica R9, 1f, Md-a, M3, M5, M-A, MP, M7 (2), M10r and hopefully soon again M6.  So it is obvious that I am in deep with Leica.

But unlike some here, I am not going to gloss over real issues that exist because that is not helpful to anyone.  I get it though, no matter the brand there are always those who defend the brand no matter what.

The thing with Leica that makes it different is that they pack that little quality check card claiming how everything has been checked multiple times.  When it is obvious that that is just lip service.  Defects happen, but when you have, apparently, a system in place to check for quality which misses such an obvious and basic thing, well….

I agree that those QA cards are meaningless - giving them to the consumer would only have a value if one could somehow get feedback from the named person about what they checked. And it would only have a value as a QC measure if there were consequences for that person - e.g. retraining. The first doesn't happen and I doubt the other does either. As it is, it's just a misleading waste of paper.

I also agree that Leica's repair times are abysmal, and have been getting worse over the years. I have had enough experience of that myself.

I don't buy the line though that Leica's QC is getting worse. There is plenty of evidence on the internet of faults going back many years. I also suspect that in the years before the internet many such faults never attained public visibility - there could actually have been more. I have been fortunate - my only experience of a fault from the factory was a Summicron-SL 90 on which I could barely turn the manual focus ring it was so stiff.

My only purpose in commenting here is to make the point that we have no idea what proportion of M6 or MP (or MA) cameras have such faults, whether they are from a particular batch of parts or cameras, or whether they are components made by Leica or bought in. Until (if ever) we have an idea of how many cameras have such a fault, we cannot credibly advise the occasional inquirer here about whether it is safe to buy a new M6/P/A (or M11).

With a MP on order, I hope to add another specimen to the sample before too long.

 

[Anbaric]

I don't think counting cameras with problems this way tells us much about how common the problem is, because people are more likely to post here if they have an issue than if they don't - you'd need a random sample. But it's still a cause for concern that 3 have turned up in a short space of time. And it's not as if Leica have never had this problem before - there have been intermittent issues at least as far back as the M4P, apparently including a whole batch of pressure plates in the M6 Classic Wetzlar days. Checking for this problem ought to be basic QC for a camera as expensive as the M6 reissue. There are any number of other cameras from various manufacturers, most produced in much greater numbers and sold for a much lower price than the Leica, where you never hear about film scratching, except when grit gets into the body (which does not seem to be the problem here). Perhaps some designs, including Leica's, are more vulnerable to problems unless everything is done perfectly.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Huss]

I don't think there is a design issue here.  Because if there was all of them would scratch.  And none of my other Ms scratch.  Or any of my other cameras! Ever. It is a parts supplier issue and it really looks like shoddy pressure plates are at fault.  The frustration is that this problem seems to be re-occuring, when one would think that if it happened once, Leica would make sure that was the end of it.

I do agree though that forums attract people with complaints looking for solutions, it's the nature of things.  I am really looking forward to getting my M6 back in 2023 (!) as it is a gorgeous and delightful camera to use.  Like all Ms.  Which is why we work through problems, and why I did not want a refund.