Nick Devlin review of 5DII has relevance to S2

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As for the broken body shell, there was a spate of those, four iirc, and much to my surprise never again, as it seems to be a combination of a slightly underengineered part and user error in replacing the bottom, which can lead to microcracks and late failure. One would expect to see it happening sporadically, but it doesn't...

Yes the sensor line. I doubt that it is restricted to these Kodak sensors, but sofar service on it has been good if I interpret the threads over here correctly.

 

Thanks Japp. (Again - my mechanic felt my Jaguar was very reliable.)

 

When Leica repairs equipment at Solms, do they follow up with a satisfaction survey?

 

Re. body shell. What do you think the results would be if every M8 were used 100% of the time mounted via the tripod socket in a vertical position? As on a QTVR head.

 

Yes Leica may be fixing at no charge, cameras that have the vertical line issue. But what causes it? If it is the sensor or electronics, are they improving something in them in current production so it won't happen on new cameras? The same with the green stripes. Why is there no solution after two years? No other camera that I am aware of has this issue. Why does the M8? Is it up to Kodak to solve this?

[Advertisement]

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

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped} The same with the green stripes. Why is there no solution after two years? No other camera that I am aware of has this issue. Why does the M8? Is it up to Kodak to solve this?

 

FWIW, and as far as I can tell (and I followed up on this for a long time with Leica Germany) the green stripe artifact is the result of not being able to mask appropriate pixels on the short edge (I think Mark N is right identifying them as control pixels). According to Solms, this is the carry over from the microlenses necessary to make the M system a 1.33 crop. I believe if they masked or vignetted the frame (or made it smaller) this artifact would not exist.

 

So I do actually believe it is up to Kodak to fix, since I'm pretty sure they also worked the microlens array as well.

 

If I were a betting man, I'm betting the next gen sensor in the next gen M9 will not have this problem; from looking at other cameras, it seems that microlens technology has progressed quite a bit since 2006

[jaapv]

 

Re. body shell. What do you think the results would be if every M8 were used 100% of the time mounted via the tripod socket in a vertical position? As on a QTVR head.

 

 

As I said, I think it is a multicausal problem. First you have to make a mistake mounting the body plate in such a way that microcracks will start to form, then you have to apply a lever to the bottom plate at a later stage, i.e. a tripod and then you have to apply breaking force to the camera. And if there has been the slightest discontinuity in the casting of the bodyshell, it may fail at this point.

I can testify that the lock is quite robust. A few weeks ago I slipped on a patch of ice and sat on my camera bag, bending the grip about thirty degrees out of true. When I removed it, it twanged and was quite banana-shaped with a torn flange. But there was no structural damage to the camera. I even took an x-ray of the lock, but I could see no cracking.

Having said that I am convinced the locking of the M3 bottom plate is a far superior design.

[Fotobug]

Something I can't understand is how Leica has become so inefficient in making lenses. In 1971 a Nikon 85 f 1.8 and a Leica M 90f2 were both priced the same - $195 list. Now the Leica lens is priced 8 times higher. And Nikon has added AF and electronic aperture control. And in that time the cost of labor has probably increased proportionally at a faster rate in Japan than it did in Germany. Has the Leica lens gotten 8 times better? Has the Nikon lens gotten worse?

 

 

Alan, I feel the pain behind this question. And, unfortunately, I fear that the answer may be painful also. Nikon and Canon may have had similar price points to Leica in the early '70's; but, I must look at how extraordinarily differently Nikon and Canon evolved. Just stop for a minute and think of how many products N&C make - break that list down into categories. Then, especially with Canon, break those categories down by volume of units produced/per year. Now get a napkin and asprin, and do the same with Leica. Now, when you look at those lists for these three companies, point out to me the number of different areas where Leica can afford to engage in competitive pricing at volume. How many did you find? I was told by a 30+ years pro photographer, whose used all film formats and manufacturers for his business [this is how he makes money to feed his family] that Canon profits in printers/copiers, alone, dwarfs the camera side (and presumably subsidizes R&D). Makes sense. I would not be surprised if Nikon has done the same thing in some of its other product areas. Or, perhaps they have simply been willing to keep prices below R&D + costs and make up the difference in volume sales. Really, look at how many models both N & C have in the slim-line digital field alone - it give my head spin.

 

So, yes, it should be possible to manufacture Leica cameras and lenses at lower prices to consumers, as far as manufacturing practices and capabilities are concerned. But I suspect that many of the managing directors and current Leica customer base *don't* want to take the globalizing steps that might require. And I don't get the idea that there is a Mr. Moneybags that is willing to put 10's or 100's Millions DM into/behind Leica to allow it to hire, equip, and tool-up, in Germany, for the volume of units needed to drive the prices of any of its camera products down. It is a company that has prided itself of the proprietary nature of most everything it makes - and the correspondingly high prices. A friend told me it reminded him of Apple and its death grip on the closed architecture of the Mac. Maybe he was not far off! Just my 2 cents.

[tashley]

I am sure that is no news to Leica fans. And why invest in Leica glass only to mount it on a cheap C DSLR? I believe the current crop of high-resolution DLSRs are still battling sensor quality more than lens quality i.e. the latter may not actually improve anything on this generation of full frame sensors. Would be nice to know how a S2 holds up in Antarctica though

 

That's great because with people like you around, people like me are able to buy very cheap second hand R glass to use on our 1DSIII and 5DII, really extending the abilities of the sensors in those cameras. The results, to which I can attest, are very fine. BTW I also shoot with an M8.2 and with a P45+ back on a Cambo technical camera with Schneider optics and am therefore quite hard to please when it comes to IQ!