rob_x2004 Posted June 19, 2009 Share #21 Posted June 19, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Rob, are you saying the camera was damaged in transit? A stout double walled box, air cushions and bubble-wrap, looks fine to me. Can you imagine the waste disposal problem they have of packaging from users who have gone completely over the top in sending their equipment in? No I am not saying that at all. If Stefan is happy I will PM him. Otherwise I will go through normal channels which does not include the forum. And no it wasnt adequately packaged either. Its just a normal cardboard box. See the line in the side panel top of frame? Thats from lenses rolling round in the carton. Had the box been holed in transit between Germany and Australia the lot would have tipped out. A previous send of this kit from Germany to Australia was holed, but in that instance items were boxed, and packed off the sides and if I recall bead filled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 19, 2009 Posted June 19, 2009 Hi rob_x2004, Take a look here My new APO Summicron 75 ASPH...not up to Leica standards!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
budrichard Posted June 19, 2009 Share #22 Posted June 19, 2009 This is my new 75 ASPH as I received it yesterday. Something just didn't seem right when I pulled it out of its plastic bag but it took me a couple of seconds to figure out what. You just don't expect a new Leica lens to have such a gross assembly error. Until I saw this lens I would not have believed it was even possible to assemble the aperture ring rotated out of alignment let alone have such an assembly error get out of the factory. I couldn't resist including the Leica inspection certificate in the photo with my new lens. Anybody else seen such a gross error with a new lens?? Mike What is the history of this lens? From who did you purchase it, are they a Leica Authorized dealer? It appears you did not purchase froma bricks and motor store otherwise you would have seen the mis-alignment. I'm not saying Leica QA was not difficient but my background in QA tells me that things are not always as simple as they appear.-Dick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted June 19, 2009 Share #23 Posted June 19, 2009 Hmm - my old 60's 135 f/4 has 2 aperture scales, top and bottom. I guess that doubled the odds of it coming out in the right place. 8^) More seriously - the 75 'cron is a superb lens, but does seem, at least recently, to have had more than its share of QC problems. See this thread: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/89365-m8-summicron-75-focus.html If Stefan is still reading this thread, the other thread may be of interest, too. (And thanks, Stefan, for paying attention!!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrie Posted June 20, 2009 Author Share #24 Posted June 20, 2009 Dear Valkyrie, Thanks for posting this thread on the forum. I am really shocked, that a lens in this condition has left our factory. Please give us the chance to correct this unacceptable error as soon as possible. We are checking our final control process to avoid such mistakes in the future. Would you please be so kind to send this lens to Solms to my personal attention? Thank you very much in advance. Again, please accept my sincere apologies for this error. Stefan Daniel Director Product Management, Leica Camera AG Stefan, thanks for your kind offer to correct the situation. The lens is already on its way back to the dealer (B&H in New York) to be replaced, so I will not be able to ship it to Solms. B&H's customer service folks were very helpful and arranged for the return promptly and without any effort on my part. The return authorization and pre-paid mailing label were emailed to me and all I had to do was tape them to the box and walk it to my local UPS store (about 50 yards from my door step). I should have the replacement lens in about a week. I am very impressed with the quality of Leica products and was in total disbelief when I got this lens. Clearly this is a one-of-a-kind lens but I couldn't quite convince myself it is a collectors item! I had intended to call Leica to make you aware of the loss of quality control, but I am glad to see that you have read my post and are taking corrective action. I have no doubt my replacement lens will be of the highest quality. Thanks for your concern. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
terence fairweather Posted June 20, 2009 Share #25 Posted June 20, 2009 I returned a 50mm Summicron (black) purchased new from Red Dot cameras which developed a squeek on the aperture ring. It was promptly replaced with another which in turn developed a total failure when the aperture ring spun round like a ferris wheel. No click stops at all. Red Dot were great I was given a full refund. I have since bought a chrome one off Ebay at half the cost and it is perfect. Leica QA! Lol. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted June 20, 2009 Share #26 Posted June 20, 2009 Funny I bought two new 50 Summicrons and both were faulty too. Also got a refund and bought an Elmar-M and eventually a DR Summicron. I also had problems with a 75 Summicron from Popflash, in my case the lens spun around on it's mount. Of course Tony had a new one in the mail before I could even repack the first one, but the second one had a similar fault but nowhere near as bad. But I kept it because I needed it and it mounted properly on one camera, which I still use it on. I'll be sending it to DAG to fix I think... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted June 21, 2009 Share #27 Posted June 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) What is the history of this lens? From who did you purchase it, are they a Leica Authorized dealer? It appears you did not purchase froma bricks and motor store otherwise you would have seen the mis-alignment.I'm not saying Leica QA was not difficient but my background in QA tells me that things are not always as simple as they appear.-Dick Dick ,What does it matter if it was purchased from a brick and mortor store of mail order? What do you mean by "not always as simple as they appear? And the other photo of the packing job from Leica is a joke. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted June 22, 2009 Share #28 Posted June 22, 2009 the bottom line is that for upwards of $3k they should come out of the factory spot on. If not it works out cheaper (half the price) to buy and keep five CV 75s and use the sharpest one. And you can bet the best of CV comes darned close, but where they have problems is on the QC... but they are at the bottom of the price spectrum not the very top (by a mile)! It has nothing to do with whether it comes from mail order or a bricks and mortar store. In fact B&H has the most liberal returns policy of the lot, likely resulting in quite a few sub standard lenses going back into stock... and most of the issues that affect a lens cannot be seen on physical inspection, only when looking at images. For an aperture ring to be on the wrong way round is terrible! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rona!d Posted June 22, 2009 Share #29 Posted June 22, 2009 I´m not sure, if Leica really delivered it this way. Maybe somebody made a joke? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 22, 2009 Share #30 Posted June 22, 2009 It is of course one of those things that cannot happen; quite apart from quality control, the lens must have been handled by a number of people before it left Solms. But we all know that the impossible has a habit of happening none the less. The strange thing is, it gave me a feeling of deja-vue. I am fairly certain that I saw a similar lens somewhere on the internet a while ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted June 22, 2009 Share #31 Posted June 22, 2009 Ron, what do you mean by "maybe somebody made a joke"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
enboe Posted June 22, 2009 Share #32 Posted June 22, 2009 From my personal experience, I think we should accept the original poster's story. Back in 2006 when the M8 came out, I ordered one via mail from an authorized US dealer as nobody in town had one available. When it arrived, the shutter, a key component and certainly part of the inspection cycle from what I'm told, arrived punctured. I contacted Leica and their instructions were to send it in for repair, at my cost, of course. I was without the camera for a little over 3 months, if I remember correctly, and the warranty was not extended by those months for the lost service. The camera went in 9 months later for SD card issues, also 3 months, 10 months later for dust and dirt in the eyepiece (Disneyland is such an extreme environment), and finally, this month for me dropping it. I inquired about periods of warranty when the camera was out of service for 9 of 24 months and was told in writing that the total period, including trips back for defects, was 24 months. I am glad the owner in this case is being taken care of. Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 22, 2009 Share #33 Posted June 22, 2009 This is not correct (any more) Nowadays, after a major repair, Leica extends a full year's warrantee, not just on the repair, but on the whole camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
budrichard Posted June 22, 2009 Share #34 Posted June 22, 2009 Dick ,What does it matter if it was purchased from a brick and mortor store of mail order? What do you mean by "not always as simple as they appear? And the other photo of the packing job from Leica is a joke. When one find an occurance of this type where there is a sign off for the component and the component is not to specification, a Root Cause investigation almost always identifies a cause which can be a number of reasons and is not always neglect. Since the lens was not inspected by the purchaser before buying, the chain of handling between Leica Solms and B&H could be any number of possibiities but we don't know, so to find fault without any evidence is premature. Of course one would like the inspection process between Leica, the importer and B&H to verify the lens is acceptable to ship but obviously this didn't happen. Did the lens have some fault that caused someone to adjust it along the way? We simply don't know, but we certainly would like to know. I would expect Stephan to investigate but with most commercal products, its usually just cheaper to solve the problem than find the Root Cause.-Dick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted June 22, 2009 Share #35 Posted June 22, 2009 I believe the Root Cause is clear: LSD in the water at Solms Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted June 22, 2009 Share #36 Posted June 22, 2009 When one find an occurance of this type where there is a sign off for the component and the component is not to specification, a Root Cause investigation almost always identifies a cause which can be a number of reasons and is not always neglect. Since the lens was not inspected by the purchaser before buying, the chain of handling between Leica Solms and B&H could be any number of possibiities but we don't know, so to find fault without any evidence is premature. Of course one would like the inspection process between Leica, the importer and B&H to verify the lens is acceptable to ship but obviously this didn't happen. Did the lens have some fault that caused someone to adjust it along the way? We simply don't know, but we certainly would like to know. I would expect Stephan to investigate but with most commercal products, its usually just cheaper to solve the problem than find the Root Cause.-Dick I can't imagine there would be any handling, except by the shipper, between Solms and B&H. Just who would handle the lens? Are you suggesting that someone , opened the box, took the lens out of the case and put the aperture ring on backward after it left the factory? No, I think it leaves the factory, B&H inventories it and it goes on a shelf, ready for shipping , simple as that. Anything is possible, ghosts, ufo's. people who disassemble and than reassemble lens while in transit, but I think this is just you're rare factory f**k up. And... the only difference an inspection before purchase would have made would be the problem might have been discovered saving a return to B&H or Solms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted June 22, 2009 Share #37 Posted June 22, 2009 Whatsoever. We have learned from Leica's Stephan Daniel that Leica understood the message and we'll see if something like the odd position of the aperture ring will happen again. What consumers can take as a lesson from this story is better to look at the object first before one buys it. Reading this thread i looked again at all my lenses. They were o.k. - with the exception of a 2.8/50 Elmar which has an aperture ring with a very odd position as well. I bought this on Ebay without having a chance to look at it before. May be it left the factory like this in 1994, may be some owner had it repaired since and it was reassembled in the odd way, may be this happened at the Customer Service at Solms, may be it happened elsewhere. Anyway i can use it on all stops and it takes photos as I exspected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted June 22, 2009 Share #38 Posted June 22, 2009 I can't imagine there would be any handling, except by the shipper, between Solms and B&H. Just who would handle the lens? This is an enigma to me as well. Who knows how long the seller had this lens on shelf ? Was it lent for a try ? I had a mystery case with a Summicron 75 Asph as well. I bought this lens recently from a shop in Wuppertal/Germany (non official Leica reseller) via internet. The lens was new (not used) but from 2005 production (s/n 39862++) The infinity setting was set at ~15 - 20m, you couldn't got it right at ∞ in the viewfinder. I can't believe this was the case as this lens left the factory brand new. I told this to the seller, returned the lens and get a refund without any problems. After that, i got another "new" Summicron 75 (s/n 39992++) which is perfect and i do like very much using with the M8. Who knows what happen in the box ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted June 22, 2009 Share #39 Posted June 22, 2009 I must admit that I prefer it when the inspector signs his/her name properly - not just a scrawl. If you have taken the trouble to sign your name maybe you have taken the trouble to look at the lens. I could imagine how if the lens was not properly assembled that this defect might appear after transit but not be seen on a final brief visual inspection. I suppose from the picture published here (and their records) that Leica knows who inspected the lens. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
budrichard Posted June 24, 2009 Share #40 Posted June 24, 2009 The point of a Root Cause Investigation is NOT to speculate about what happened or what you think did or did not happen along the way. No investigation. no Root Cause! It would be sad if the the NTSB conducted thier fact finding and Root Cause as some members of this Forum have done. It's also sad that Leica appears not to want to investigate these occurances. -Dick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.