Leica Warranties - and Leica as a company

[bherman01545]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Obviously, a controversial topic, but here it goes anyway...

Leica may or may not produce the best cameras or lenses. That is a topic for fierce debates. What I can tell you however is what personally sold me on the company and Leica brand. For example, Sigma (part of the L Mount Alliance) makes some great lenses, (I own a few) but the warranty is with the original owner (who must personally have the receipt), and it must come from a Sigma authorized dealer and not gray market. Subsequently, once a lens has been sold to another user, the warranty is null and void, unless you can track down the original purchaser and they have the receipt, and they would need to send the lens in for you. 

Anyway, back to Leica. For as long as I can remember, I always used Leica cameras. Back in the analog days, it was an M4, and M6, a Leicaflex SL and SL2 (several of which I use today) In any case, close to 20 years ago, I bought a used Leica M8 from someone on a forum? which was by all accounts new as it only has 1250 actuations. For those of you who remember, the camera had issues with high ISO banding (back then, ISO 1250 was considered high ISO) I don't think that Leica published an official Service Advisory for that issue, (like Canon or Nikon does) but I know that they honored the M8 repairs under warranty. My camera unfortunately did exhibit the banding, even at ISO 800, so I sent it to Leica, NJ with a letter indicating that I bought the camera second hand, etc. and I held my breath for a high $$ estimate. 

I was told by their service department that once a technician looked the camera over, they would respond to me with a written estimate. Several weeks passed, and I received a package in the mail from Leica Camera, NJ. I opened it up and read the service report. They replaced main board and sensor, aligned the rangefinder, CLA, cost $0.00! I thought that they made an error. Not to question them, but I called the service department and they had explained to me that the warranty follows the camera. The warranty would either be the manufacture date on the sticker or a bill of sale from a Leica dealer, whichever is more recent, so even if the camera had been bought/sold a few times, there could still be the remainder of the warranty left. In my particular case, there was.

So, in my mind, there is no debate. I choose to pay more money to a company who truly stands behind their equipment, (regardless of the owner) their name and their brand.

 

Edited September 11 by bherman01545

[ajmarton1]

I find their customer support and warranty service to top notch.  I hope it doesn’t change over time.  I have even received vintage parts for free from their NJ center.  But there was also a time when I thought an SL moisture intrusion issue should have been covered and it was not.  But overall always a good experience.

[Eclectic Man]

I remember when Leica's came with a 'passport', a 30 year warranty against even accidental damage.  I fell over and my R6.2 in my camera bag suffered a bent hot shoe.  This was repaired by Leica at no charge.  Not sure this would happen now.

[bherman01545]

4 minutes ago, Eclectic Man said:

I remember when Leica's came with a 'passport', a 30 year warranty against even accidental damage.  I fell over and my R6.2 in my camera bag suffered a bent hot shoe.  This was repaired by Leica at no charge.  Not sure this would happen now.

I think that you meant a 3-year Passport Warranty and not 30-year 😊

[Eclectic Man]

Hmm, I may be confusing the warranty on cameras and binoculars.  The R6.2 was bought new, so it was some time last century ...

[Jeff S]

Agree with regard to warranty policy and support.  But US service has experienced many bumps over time regarding QC and turnaround.  Don Goldberg has provided me with quicker, better and less costly repair outside warranty.  However, he’s become better known and much busier over the years, and digital gear increasingly requires calibration that only Leica can provide. 
 

 

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, bherman01545 said:

Obviously, a controversial topic, but here it goes anyway...

Leica may or may not produce the best cameras or lenses. That is a topic for fierce debates. What I can tell you however is what personally sold me on the company and Leica brand. For example, Sigma (part of the L Mount Alliance) makes some great lenses, (I own a few) but the warranty is with the original owner (who must personally have the receipt), and it must come from a Sigma authorized dealer and not gray market. Subsequently, once a lens has been sold to another user, the warranty is null and void, unless you can track down the original purchaser and they have the receipt, and they would need to send the lens in for you. 

Anyway, back to Leica. For as long as I can remember, I always used Leica cameras. Back in the analog days, it was an M4, and M6, a Leicaflex SL and SL2 (several of which I use today) In any case, close to 20 years ago, I bought a used Leica M8 from someone on a forum? which was by all accounts new as it only has 1250 actuations. For those of you who remember, the camera had issues with high ISO banding (back then, ISO 1250 was considered high ISO) I don't think that Leica published an official Service Advisory for that issue, (like Canon or Nikon does) but I know that they honored the M8 repairs under warranty. My camera unfortunately did exhibit the banding, even at ISO 800, so I sent it to Leica, NJ with a letter indicating that I bought the camera second hand, etc. and I held my breath for a high $$ estimate. 

I was told by their service department that once a technician looked the camera over, they would respond to me with a written estimate. Several weeks passed, and I received a package in the mail from Leica Camera, NJ. I opened it up and read the service report. They replaced main board and sensor, aligned the rangefinder, CLA, cost $0.00! I thought that they made an error. Not to question them, but I called the service department and they had explained to me that the warranty follows the camera. The warranty would either be the manufacture date on the sticker or a bill of sale from a Leica dealer, whichever is more recent, so even if the camera had been bought/sold a few times, there could still be the remainder of the warranty left. In my particular case, there was.

So, in my mind, there is no debate. I choose to pay more money to a company who truly stands behind their equipment, (regardless of the owner) their name and their brand.

 

Is there a question or a point for this post?

[bherman01545]

14 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

Is there a question or a point for this post?

The point is that many folks complain about Leica service or in particular their warranty, but IMO, their warranty is industry leading

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, bherman01545 said:

Subsequently, once a lens has been sold to another user, the warranty is null and void, unless you can track down the original purchaser and they have the receipt, and they would need to send the lens in for you. 

Only in the USA. For instance Europe this will be illegal. And Leica is a law-abiding European company. 

[Photoworks]

1 minute ago, bherman01545 said:

The point is that many folks complain about Leica service or in particular their warranty, but IMO, their warranty is industry leading

Not sure what you are comparing it to?

Me as a professional,  a service of 4-6 months in not leading any standard.

You mentioned Sigma. I have done repairs of lenses with them. I got a dropped lens repaired and back to me in 5 days in NYC, Sigma charged me less than $300.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Eclectic Man said:

Hmm, I may be confusing the warranty on cameras and binoculars.  The R6.2 was bought new, so it was some time last century ...

Actually, I had a forty-year old Trinovid refurbished under warranty a few years ago. 

[Rmccoole]

Leica would not fix my TL 55-135 lens after they stopped making the CL. They claimed they had no parts. That’s not good service. And I agree with previous post that repair time periods are not those of a leading company. 

[IkarusJohn]

I’ve had more than my fair share of repairs bothe at Solms and Wetzlar (every Leica digital I’ve owned has gone back - sensor corrosion, two cameras bricked, motherboard failures etc) and Customer Service has been exemplary; slow, but exemplary.

Leica’s issues are less to do with repairs; more to do with faulty electronics, supply chain issues and poor implementation (a combination of overly ambitious design, poor component selection and firmware development).  Realistically, each of Leica’s M cameras with a battery (probably with the exception of the M5) have failed to do what’s on the tin for their anticipated (marketed?) useable life.  The M10, I’d say, is probably the best I’ve had, but even my M10-D had two lengthy holidays in Germany …

[Jeff S]

I’ve had the opposite experience, pure luck and/or having never been an early adopter, with (besides film bodies) 2 M8.2s, M9M, M240, M10, M10-R and M10M. Probably just jinxed myself.  DAG has been used primarily for a couple of lens issues.  My SL2 has been issue-free other than a torn covering, a known problem discussed here.

Edit… and no problems with my R system 

Edited September 11 by Jeff S

[Photoworks]

I had 3 issues with SL lenses

24-90 they replaced for missing parts, and 6 months time, at the  estimated repair cost

SL50 APO, where the SL2 decided to initiate a Firmware update and failed in the middle of a shoot, 5 months wait, and $600

SL75 under warranty replaced

Let's not count the 3 dead SF60 flashes that nobody does any repairs on.

M11 had the shutter replaced, under warranty for a month, NJ took 3 weeks to fix

I am looking forward to the day NJ can service SL cameras and lenses; it would cut repairs down a bit.

In the Past, i had Canon with great CPS service and 1 week repairs. Sony had a paid service, but some of the lenses stopped working and were all the one i serviced glued together; there are only replacements. Nikon was never great and always had extra cameras because one or two were always in service for months; this was the digital D1's.

I understand your mileage may vary in the different parts of the world, but I have lots of Leica equipment, so service is a must!

[jaapv]

7 hours ago, Rmccoole said:

Leica would not fix my TL 55-135 lens after they stopped making the CL. They claimed they had no parts. That’s not good service. And I agree with previous post that repair time periods are not those of a leading company. 

My  out of guarantee 55-135 fell apart in  three pieces a year ago. Leica had indeed no spare parts so they replaced it by a brand new one at a third of the price. 

[Jeff S]

Since joining the forum in 2009, I’ve read about many differing and seemingly inconsistent service and associated cost experiences between different members.  Many receive very generous treatment, even out of warranty, while others not. This maybe isn’t unexpected from a small, more “personal” company, and perhaps there are unknown intervening circumstances, but that’s what I’ve observed.

[pgh]

It’s a mixed bag.

The first year I owned my M10, it spent 7-8 months back in Germany through 2 trips. Really could have used it that year. Still, it is now the digital camera I’ve owned for the longest time in my life (8 years), and it is still going fine.

Repair times are unacceptable for professional applications as has been noted repeatedly, and the mantra of having to own 2-3 bodies is, while the best solution, insulting to the average photographer who has to stretch to get one body. And two bodies isn’t so good when one is gone a lot. 

My issues have been with QC out of the factory (as I’ve noted many times, I have purchased 3 digital Leicas new, all 3 have had issues of varying degrees). I’ve purchased more than that used, none with issue except for the sticky rangefinder on my M10-D, which probably had to do with the fact that the 6 year old camera had only taken a few hundred images ever. And Leica inexplicably (and I am grateful) fixed this for no charge in under 3 months. I’d have paid a few hundred to have it back quicker.

Communication at front and back end of repair process has always been good. Service has always been what I needed it to be. It just takes too long and in my last service they were out of loaners even. A nice warranty and service (slow, but good in my experience) is okay but better QC is better. 

At this point it seems obvious to me that people who buy into a new Leica product within the first year (or even 2) of release are paying to be beta testers of an unfinished product. That works for some people, but the price and the risk levels are too high for me. The best Leica is a lightly used one that the previous owner has had the trouble of finding all the problems with and repairing. 

Edited September 12 by pgh

[jaapv]

The point about QC is that it is hard to get that up to something like 100% in a hand-assembled production process. Robots are repetitive and make the same mistake over and over. So you can take one product in 100, or 1000 off the assembly belt and test that to destruction to find each and every production flaw in that batch. However: handbuilt? Humans make random mistakes so each product must be inspected individually at each production stage, by a human inspector who will make random mistakes. The only option is to have an end inspection which cannot be destructive and may well miss something, not just because it will only come out in actual use, but again, the inspector may miss something when inspecting hundreds a day. 
Obviously, over time it will become clear which production errors are more common, making it possible to prevent them and pay specific attention, making the results more reliable. 

I am sure that Leica or any handmade producer would welcome a solution to this conundrum. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jdlaing]

Hand built when they started making Leica bodies would be appropriate. Nowadays it is more like hand assembled from modules.