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

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Can’t blame Leica, instead blame the customers who willingly jump on the treadmill. 

[UliWer]

vor 21 Minuten schrieb Manunagra5:

They totally don't care about film guys like us.

If they wouldn't care they wouldn't produce film cameras any more. Since they still do so, they are expected to deliver the quality and quality control which is an important factor for their marketing.

If one searches long enough in this Forum one might even find some examples of important people at Leica seeing the problem:

 

[Manunagra5]

20 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Can’t blame Leica, instead blame the customers who willingly jump on the treadmill. 

Blaming or not, Leica will have a lot of work in repairing brand new film cameras in the future! Blame customers if you want but law is behind customers. When you pay 5k for a camera, you shouldn't have to be paranoic asking for test before buying. Leica doesn't have at the moment any quality control and if i'm wrong, this control is very bad. In my work, impossible to do mistakes like that, i would be instantanely fired! Sorry if i want the mechanical perfection and i paid for that. 

Edited February 2, 2023 by Manunagra5

[jaapv]

That was not what I said… I reacted to your assertion that Leica had wild plans for an M12. 

[Manunagra5]

7 minutes ago, jaapv said:

That was not what I said… I reacted to your assertion that Leica had wild plans for an M12. 

Ah ok sorry. Leica is breaking friendships with their pressure plates!

[Fotoklaus]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb Mooshoepork:

Wrong, look how many there are on eBay. It’s more common than you’d think 

Im think an early MP from 2003/04/05 is the best bang for the buck, if someone wants a "new as possible" Film-M.

No Zinc bubbles, new MP-finder and still the original Leica- Quality.

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, romualdo said:

looks like the first batch was the MP6 - just found that out so it really was a run of 2000 MP's for the launch in '03

My camera is from the first run #2880643 and it's definitely an MP.

[Huss]

6 hours ago, Manunagra5 said:

Hi everyone, if you can, try this simple experience. Put a film in your MP, and take 10 photos with pressure plate opened, and 10 photos with pressure plate closed and 10 again with pressure plate opened. It's what i did in the leica store and after that, the technician told me "you are right, it's the pressure plate, so we ll return yoir mp to germany to fix the problem". One month later, leica sent me back the mp, and told to the seller that thay hace problems with pressure plates. What is killing me is that sellers never have heard of scratches problems! So i give them the link of l-camera but no answer hahaha. Of course they are protecting the company. It's the reason i think we all should make videos in youtube. A lot of potential buyers are looking to youtube reviews before buying a leica, and often, they are hesitating a lot. I'm regretting totally my purchase and i probably didn't buy a MP if y could see a video about these problem of scratches!!! Imagine, 5000 euros now for a MP and a lot of people are receiving camera who destroys their film! It's a joke, so a video will come next from me and an another guy in paris who have the same problem with a new M6.. Thanks to L-camera, to make me realize we are a lot in this situation.

I never thought about testing it like that.  So simple too... Ah well, my M6 is back with Leica for a second attempt.

I'm one of those that, apparently naively, thought the whole point about buying new is risks are removed about what has happened to the camera in the past, and you get a full warranty in the off chance that something is wrong.

The warranty is only useful if Leica can fix what is wrong.  With my camera they failed on the first attempt.

[Huss]

FYI if you test by shooting with the pressure plate open, make sure that you have reattached the base plate!  That is needed to guide the film correctly.

[Huss]

5 hours ago, romualdo said:

looks like there were 3 MP batches made in 2002 (from Laney, 2nd edn, p. 599) - my MP is near the beginning of the third run

2880101 - 2881100 (999)

2889101 - 2890100 (999)

2890101 - 2891100 (999)

other source

2880101 - 2881100 MP 6 (black)2002 - 1,000

2889101 - 2891100 MP (black+chrom)2002 - 2,000

My MP, bought used, is from the third batch  in 2002.  And it is perfect, smooth and sweet.  Wish my brand new M6 was as good.

[LuckySquirrel]

6 minutes ago, Huss said:

FYI if you test by shooting with the pressure plate open, make sure that you have reattached the base plate!  That is needed to guide the film correctly.

Would you also leave the pressure plate open (with base plate attached) when rewinding the film for this test?

[Steve Ricoh]

11 minutes ago, Huss said:

I never thought about testing it like that.  So simple too... Ah well, my M6 is back with Leica for a second attempt.

I'm one of those that, apparently naively, thought the whole point about buying new is risks are removed about what has happened to the camera in the past, and you get a full warranty in the off chance that something is wrong.

The warranty is only useful if Leica can fix what is wrong.  With my camera they failed on the first attempt.

I mentioned this earlier in the M6 scratching thread:

On 1/29/2023 at 4:49 PM, Steve Ricoh said:

Any benefit for the diagnosis to run a roll, or part of a roll, with the back disengaged, or partly disengaged (if that’s possible)?

Film is expensive but the 2022 M6 is orders of magnitude more.

 

[Huss]

1 minute ago, LuckySquirrel said:

Would you also leave the pressure plate open (with base plate attached) when rewinding the film for this test?

That's an interesting point.  I think you should as otherwise it defeats the purpose of having the film not touch the pressure plate for part of the test.

If the camera passes this test with no scratches, then the next would be to wind another roll through the camera with the pressure plate open the entire time, then rewind it w the pressure plate closed and then check the film to see if it is the rewinding process.

[Huss]

Just now, Steve Ricoh said:

I mentioned this earlier in the M6 scratching thread:

 

You sure did.  Somehow missed that.

[250swb]

3 minutes ago, Huss said:

My MP, bought used, is from the third batch  in 2002.  And it is perfect, smooth and sweet.  Wish my brand new M6 was as good.

‘One owner from new’ experience is good to have as cameras get older. Mine hasn’t needed a thing doing to it in the past twenty years, not bad considering there’s sometimes been advice on the forum that M’s need a CLA every two or three years (the guy must have been a camera repairer looking for business). But it goes to show that if Leica can do their job the camera itself should be reliable for years and years to come, but that’s a big ‘if’.

[LuckySquirrel]

34 minutes ago, Huss said:

That's an interesting point.  I think you should as otherwise it defeats the purpose of having the film not touch the pressure plate for part of the test.

If the camera passes this test with no scratches, then the next would be to wind another roll through the camera with the pressure plate open the entire time, then rewind it w the pressure plate closed and then check the film to see if it is the rewinding process.

My only concern/question would then be: is the film more likely to potentially come into contact with one of the "bridges" on the frame of the camera if there is no pressure plate to hold down the film? Because if so, we may be essentially removing one problem but creating an opportunity for another to show (that wouldn't actually occur in standard practice).

[LuckySquirrel]

9 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

Did you check the film for scratches before running it through the camera?  Apologies if I missed that.

Sorry just catching up on the new replies in this thread. I used multiple new rolls of film (some from various manufacturers) and the scratches occurred in the same location each time (and were consistent throughout the length of the film depending on how many shots I used). I didn't want to look at the film prior to the test because I figured pulling out the new film from the canister was potentially introducing an opportunity for scratches (that I hope wouldn't be on new film anyway).

[250swb]

Just now, LuckySquirrel said:

My only concern/question would then be: is the film more likely to potentially come into contact with one of the "bridges" on the frame of the camera if there is no pressure plate to hold down the film? Because if so, we may be essentially removing one problem but creating an opportunity for another to show (that wouldn't actually occur in standard practice).

To be honest all these testing methods have been mentioned before, but they were drowned out by the incessant flak from a couple of people suggesting that the user shouldn’t have to do any testing because it’s Leica’s problem to sort out. The point was always if Leica can’t find the problem maybe rather than remain helpless the user base should try.

[Emtsoh]

9 minutes ago, 250swb said:

To be honest all these testing methods have been mentioned before, but they were drowned out by the incessant flak from a couple of people suggesting that the user shouldn’t have to do any testing because it’s Leica’s problem to sort out. The point was always if Leica can’t find the problem maybe rather than remain helpless the user base should try.

Testing a new film camera is a good idea. Better to check in the store instead wasting some good shots/negatives/prints later.

Nevertheless, Leica should replace any faulty new camera as long as it can not be repaired (which is strange to start with but everything is in business possible..). 

On a positive note: Leica offers new film cameras and that is great. I wish Zeiss and Voigtländer do the same soon (again). 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[LuckySquirrel]

3 minutes ago, 250swb said:

To be honest all these testing methods have been mentioned before, but they were drowned out by the incessant flak from a couple of people suggesting that the user shouldn’t have to do any testing because it’s Leica’s problem to sort out. The point was always if Leica can’t find the problem maybe rather than remain helpless the user base should try.

I understand what you're saying - it can often be difficult to stay up to date on all messages in these popular threads (especially when we all have busy lives). But I feel that I've done more than enough troubleshooting for someone who purchased a new camera (hours of research, 5+ rolls of new film, cleaning a new camera, inspecting with jeweler's loupes, etc.).

I also can see the POV from both sides of the coin - people can and should be willing to try to help themselves rather than only relying on others. But I think that argument loses a little of its appeal when you're talking about a new item, that is supposedly as good as it gets. I get that this example won't be entirely relevant as there is a vast difference in the complexity of the products (but just stating it for illustrative purposes). If you purchased a new (insert top of the line car depending on your personal preferences...let's take a Porsche GT3 as an example since it's another German product and a car I personally like) and it had a "clunking" noise from the engine compartment. I'd imagine the best course of action would be to take it back to the dealership and say "fix it" as opposed to rolling out the toolbox and starting to take apart the engine.

I think as soon as we try to do some of these tests to isolate the issue, we are then not using the product how it was designed to be used and are introducing other potential issues (which may detract from the ability to identify the root cause as opposed to highlighting it).

Before sending this camera back, I'm happy to sacrifice another new roll of film (funny I will have used 6 rolls of film before I ever take an actual shot), but am just trying to ascertain the best test I can do. I'm actually sitting at my work desk with the camera, a new roll of film, some lens wipes & my rocket air blower ready to go haha.