For those who feel “Leica should have known”

[davidada]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree a law suit is not going to any one any good, as for the reviewers I can understand from Sean, methodology how he really did not notice the problems. Shooting in daylight the camera is a dream and the files are really the best I have seen from a handheld digital.

A friend brought over a 50 year old mint 85 1.5 Summarex and I shot a portrait with hte M8 and it clearly was an outstanding looking file it had a clearly defined Leica fingerprint about it.

Waht concerns me most is that:

A. Leica new of the problems and yet released the camera ahead of time

B. They need to act quickly with an answer

C.That answer should be a "hot swop" anyone familiar with computers will know the phrase

it means you will have no down time, as a registered owner Leica should send you a new M8.01 and by return packing you send them your M8. If Leica agree to this path I can wait and feel secure.

[Advertisement]

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

[docdave]

Wow! This situation keeps getting worse and worse for LEICA public relations. The LUMINOUS LANSCAPE revelations depict a real level of duplicity in this whole scenario.Did LEICA think that the world's photographers wouldn't notice these substantial deficiencies. Are they that self-deluded? This camera should NOT have been released...period. More work needs to be done. It is defective and subpar. It is, essentially, an incomplete idea.

 

I feel sorry for those that currently have one in hand. The repair process will be onorous and very inconvenient.

 

DAVE

[blatent liar]

Sometimes we just need to vent, or in the least we like to see ourselves speak.

 

I believe given the timeline involved, between testing and production QC, Leica should most certainly have prepared an official statement, Worthy of their users, which reflects the issue.

 

Their current statement dodges the issue, and abates an answer as to the Cause and Effect.

 

My frustration as a new Leica M8 owner is not a matter of who is to blame, (Kodak, may have sent them bad sensors, Leica, shoud have QC'd them individually)

 

The main Issue, is a matter of their "Statement".

 

We are all reasonably technically saavy, and to this extent we expect a Public statement which is in line with our Expectations/Expertise

 

e.g.; Leica Camera AG has discovered a few technical issues with it's Release of the M8 Digital Camera, and identified the issue to be innate to the "Kodak Sensor", implemented in it's first Production run. This issue can/cannot be cured by sensor replacement, and a means to this end will be announced soon. We recommend that everyone continue to enjoy their camera for it's strong Photographic capabilities, in the interim, as Leica sets about to replace these malfunctioning Cameras, on a one for one basis through their Authorized Leica Retailer.

 

As an interim solution, Leica will release a Firmware update to cure Auto White Balance, and Leica recommends the use of an IR cut filter where Black Color shift/s need to be corrected

Cheers

 

Max

[MSmelik]

Reading this makes me feel angry.... ...

 

And then there are posts to be patient, be fair etc.

 

This is absolutely scandalous.

 

And as for reviewers .... ( Don't take it out on the reviewers, please. This is not their fault. AB)

 

 

 

I had laid my thoughts on this to rest, but after reading reichmans bit.... what can I say. I am returning everything on monday and will not ever buy Leica stuff again. It might turn out to be the best thing since sliced bread, I will then be happy with the next best thing ...

 

Don't all you people feel taken for a ride, or areyou going to keep up this shit about being patient, and giving them the chance etc. etc.

[Guest lll]

At first: A journalist who is telling only half of the truth he knows is a liar!

 

But: A tester is no journalist. He has to tell nothing in public as he is responsible only to the company. Tests during development are never ment for publishing.

 

Reviews are a completely different thing. A reviewer should have no close relationship with the company whose products he is testing. The responsibility for his report is only with him. If any restrictions are attempted, it is up to him , to force them back - ore to resign , which can only mean, not to publish it in whole! I expect an independent public judgement from him, nothing less.

 

A company is only responsible for its products. If they think, something is ready to the market its up to them. The market will judge if its good enough, fairly priced etc, even compared to other companies products. If the market decides, it is not, oK...

 

Companies are selling "sufficient quality", not more. When BMW once decided to buy the gearbox for their new 3-series from GM rather than from ZF, nearly no client knew that. But at BMW they knew and they knew as well that the reliability was much worse - but good enough.

 

So when Leica decided to bring the M8 out into the market they have to face posssible image problems due to an obviously not sufficient quality. I can´t understand their decision as they know their quality addicted clients and how hard it will be getting back the lost confidence. It will not be done by fixing the current problems of the first series. They are responsible for the damage in image which is bad not only for the clients but for their own future too. They should have known that it is easier to deal with impatient clients than with disappointed ones.

 

But once again at the end: the real betrayal was only done by the liars who call themselves journalists - however they felt to be forced to.

 

Friedhelm Fett

TV-journalist

[MSmelik]

.. Friedhelm (I ((think)) I know you btw.)

 

hasn't this ethics discussion been going for a while now. (outside this leica disaster)

 

it's all got to do with money ...

 

Don't you ever get offered something in return ?

 

ethics are hard to find these days... as professional reviewers are...

 

... what people will do for a free M8 ....

[andy_mclean]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't think there is any escaping it, this is scandalous stuff and strikes to the heart of the relationship between the 'review' industry and the product manufacturers. There is no question that Leica has leaned on at least two major internet review sites in order to let the launch go ahead of a product that doesn't meet performance standards under "certain" conditions. How about ALL conditions? There is IR given off by every light source.. the sun and artificial light too. It is a question of degree.

 

Their recent announcement leaves considerable scope for interpretation of just what the 'problem' is.

 

Frankly, I find Phil Askey's comments odious. He has conspired (worked?) with Leica to fleece unsuspecting customers of thousands of pounds in the full knowledge that the performance of the camera wasn't what it should have been.

 

LL didn't act in the consumers best interests either, although do acknowledge that and have come clean... thus generating even more negative publicity for Leica. There should be credit given to them in coming clean, even if considerable concern remains over the decision to acquiesce to Leica's requests.

 

If these review sites have no power or influence.. then why do the manufacturers give them cameras to review?

 

In the case of Sean, whose different, more user experience based approach I subscribe to and enjoy, then I'm sure he is feeling more than a little sheepish for not having picked up on these aspects. His emphasis is on B&W photography, that he was looking primarily for. It is also noteworthy that he spent his own money on an M8. He did put his money where his mouth was... and in that respect we can ask little more of him can we not?

 

How many other 'reviewers' did the same?

 

Bottom line is that Leica have manipulated the review process to their financial advantage to the clear disadvantage of their customers... and several major review sites let them.

 

Of course Leica knew about IR breakthrough. They MUST have done to generate profiles etc. Test chart after test chart would have been scrutinised and poured over...

 

... and yet.... if the M8 works as it should, if they can fix this, then despite all this chicanery then they will cash in big time will they not? Because we want to give them our money in return for such a camera.

 

Even now, we want them to succeed. Even here folks gave Leica all the benefit of the doubt, this thread was predicated on that.

 

Nobody wants Leica to fail... and that is part of the problem that is emerging I think and has clouded everyone's judgement that has been involved. Everyone knows what success, or failure means to this cherished little company and it's fanatical user base.

 

Do I think less of Leica now than 1 week ago. It pains me to say it, but yes. I thought they were beyond this sort of thing. Didn't we all?

 

Yet I can still understand the huge commercial pressures all of them were under. We all can, which explains the tolerance of the problem when it first came to light. Not from reviewers, but the first 4 or 5 members here to get one in their hands...and afterall, it is so damn close to the camera we all want. We are bursting a gut to try and like it and make it work ourselves.. witness Guy and others spending significant sums and time chasing down IR cut-off filters.

 

Do I still want them to pull the rabbit out of the hat? Absolutely. Who doesn't?

 

Even now, they still have a product that everyone wants to see be all it can be. How much more slack than that can be cut?

 

As for teh 'reviewers'.. well, they are Leica fans too it would appear. They understand the power and mystique of the brand, they want Leica to succeed too. Clearly they do. Everyone damn well does. Who here would have blown the whistle in that situation knowing exactly what it would mean?

 

I suspect that people's integrity has been pushed to the limit over this, beyond the limit. Lot's of people... Yet it is so tantalisingly close isn't it? Or is it?

 

Best wishes-

Andy

[Guest lll]

Martin,

 

it is only around one year ago, a big car manufacturer asked journalists what kind of gifts and goodies they would accept. I wrote back: No problem with any gift, even if it´s a new car, BUT: don´t think you can buy me. They usually send me a calender :-))

You have to know for yourself, where good relationship ends and corruptancy begins.

 

For me the sheer fact is incredible that somebody recieves a pre-production camera (wether for testing, means: finding out weak points in order to give the company the chance to fix them, or just for photographing in order to get pictures for their catalouges) and writes a public rewiev. Following faults are publishing only the positive half or taking money from readers. In my eyes these are the scandals. Not everybody of these first "users" behaved like that. Have a look at Ronald and you know how it could have done much more decent and better.

 

Regards

Friedhelm

[larry]

Attacks on the reviewers and innuendo that there was a conspiracy are unfounded and shows profound ignorance about the editorial process on the part of those promoting these ideas.

 

Larry

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}I suspect that people's integrity has been pushed to the limit over this, beyond the limit. Lot's of people... Yet it is so tantalisingly close isn't it? Or is it?

 

Best wishes-

Andy

 

Yes, it is. It's a great camera and I believe that Leica will fix both its major flaw--the streaking / blobs.

 

Honestly, I'm not even sure why they released it as is, though I'm happy to have it. I all but have very good workarounds for the color problems; the streaking is much more difficult since I can't control the ambient light in a room...

 

However--one thing that has not been mentioned yet is how much more like the Canons this thing really, really is, in terms of latitude in the shadows. Wow. So much more than the DMR--at least a stop--it isn't funny. And the detail there is fabulous.

 

So I'm hopeful and well, shocked. I feel sorry for Michael Reichmann and for Sean, though both did a good job; I've never bought anything based on a dPreview test

[ho_co]

@ho_co

Your reference to the NASA is very fitting, but not in the sense meant by you.

 

For both major accidents of the space shuttle, we know now that it has not been so much an engineering failure but rather a management failure, that is, what management did with the technical information avilable to them and how it impacted the launch decision.

Jean-Pierre--

You make good points, but miss mine. The Challenger explosion on launch was a tragedy caused by rushed and stupid management as you say.

 

But my reference was to the loss of a Mars orbiter: The folks who designed the spacecraft used metric measurements, while Lockheed, who designed and built the would-be orbiter, used imperial units. Just as stupid as the Challenger launch decision, but caused by simply assuming that "the others and I must be doing it the same way." The facts were available, but no one noticed. In this case, the result was a fiasco but not a tragedy.

 

More data at http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/

 

--HC

[ho_co]

This really will make an excellent business school case study someday. The egregious thing to me is how Leica seems to be taking advantage of the generous goodwilll its customers are willing to give it. I think Reichmann is rooting for Leica just like the rest of us, and when they asked him to redact part of his review and told him the problems would be fixed, he accepted it at face value. I think Leica may find that goodwill is rapidly leaking away at this point.

Clay, you are right. Let's see what happens Monday. Leica should stop sales till the problems are resolved. It's a pity this forum is such a small sector of the Leica buyers. Leica will have a major problem if they don't correct the problems right away. And maybe all that will be left of Leica will be a business school case study.

 

But both Reichmann and Reid say they purchased M8's. I feel cheated by the company, but I wonder if tomorrow I may see my current complete distaste for the company as an over-reaction. I hope so.

 

--HC

[ho_co]

I too worry about whether as a forum group we are a minority of M8 purchasers and are viewed by Leica as such. Perhaps a forum letter with all affected members attesting to the very real problems should be sent to Leica?

Very good idea, David.

 

Someone in the US should talk directly to Christian Erhardt and Roger Horn. Anyone in Europe should address Gero Furchheim (I think he's back in Germany) and someone higher.

 

Under no circumstances should we all send individual emails to these parties because that would only annoy. But we need concerted action.

 

--HC

[reddawn]

But both Reichmann and Reid say they purchased M8's. I feel cheated by the company, but I wonder if tomorrow I may see my current complete distaste for the company as an over-reaction. I hope so.

 

I think our collective problem is that we have such a huge emotional investment in the brand we are always willing to forgive and forget.

[andy_mclean]

Hi James,

 

I was trying to get to the heart of the predicament that people were placed in, or found themselves in over this. I don't accept that non-disclosure of known shortcomings by reviewers is acceptable, particularly when statements are pulled immediately prior to release.

 

And Larry, I have reviewed articles for many scientific journals. It is unethical and unproffessional to let the article's authors have direct influence over what the reviewer may say. They are free to argue their case in light of the reviewers comments though. Even then, the system isn't perfect. It may be different in the broader world of publishing. In which case a certain integrity is lost in the process.. and the readers should be made explicitly aware of this contrievance. You suggest that because this is frequently the case and that's OK. I don't accept that, whether it is common practise or not.

 

I was trying to say that the an awful lot of pressure has been distributed throughout the 'system' by the M8. Folks were bound to be compromised by it one way or another given certain flaws it has. Yet still, it highlights certain concerns at how the system operates. I think these are valid concerns.

 

Finally, I recognise how good the camera is, how close it is to 'perfection'. That shouldn't disguise the fact it isn't perfect and indeed suffers from known and previously recognised flaws that the review system did pick up on, but consumers weren't informed about... and were left to discover for themselves.

 

These same flaws later being deemed unaccpetable by Leica.

 

I don't know whether they will get it right. I do trust that they are trying to. There is part of me that can't help thinking that this is a huge stramash over an IR cut-off filter or two... and that a B&W camera of excpetionally high resolution would have been snapped up too.

 

Enjoy your M8. I would like one too... but once the dust settles down... and I too have sympathy for Michael Reichmann and Sean... as well as several hundred at Leica and M8 owners that felt a great sense of dissappointment with the IQ, under certain conditions, of their new purchase.

 

Best wishes-

Andy

[ho_co]

Reichmann has now come clean, and that's to his credit. He's obviously very torn about the matter.

 

Two possibilities for LuLa, it seems to me.

 

First: Don't publish. That would have left us dissatisfied and without the insights of an excellent photographer, and I don't know that this is a good solution. Reichmann could have said, "Well, I tried the M8 and it is great. But it has some major problems that Leica asked me not to mention. So I've decided not to publish anything until Leica gets the problems fixed."

 

Second: Publish the full review that he submitted to Leica, along with whatever comment they wanted to add--perhaps the same comments Christian gave Reid.

 

David Teo Boon Hwee is right. We are all too much in love with these lenses and bodies for our own good.

 

--HC

[ChrisC]

HC,

 

I read your original post and the early replies soon after they were placed. Things have been nagging me for several days as I have followed the M8 story in [particularly] this excellent forum, and I returned to this thread to voice what [only a few hours ago] were heretical thoughts about Leica's integrity and much heralded customer considerations. I genuinely admire the decent traits you exhibited in your original post for this thread, but all week I have felt that your [and others] enthusiasm for certain Leica products was dangerously mis-invested in suppositions about the company itself.

 

All camera makers are capable of making stupid decisions and most do. Whilst posters were dreamily remembering how brilliant Leica lenses are when giving the company benefit of doubt over their knowledge of failings in the production M8, I could not get out of my head the experience I had when trying to purchase my first digital camera which was needed as a visual 'notebook'. I travelled a 60mile roundtrip for a hands-on test of a Digilux 2, went outside of the shop with the manager, pressed the shutter release, and the camera froze for 6 seconds while a single RAW file was being written.The marketers described the Digilux as ".......a digital photojournalist camera. As spontaneous a moment might be, and even when light conditions are poor-the Digilux enables every photographer to inconspicuously capture extraordinary moments with brilliant photographs". They ommitted the part about it being every six seconds if you need to shoot RAW. I returned home pondering which idiot thought it would be a good idea to put a red dot on a camera whose shooting speed in it's highest quality setting was one image per six seconds. This experience has haunted me in recent days as the M8 production faults have been revealed, and frankly I decided very early on that Leica had behaved contemptibly.

 

Regardless of what we know here, as of two hours ago my nearest Leica dealer did not know whether the M8 was still shipping, and was only vaguely aware there might be some colour issues with the camera!

 

Howard, I take no pleasure in your need to retract the honourable things you felt for Leica. The level of apology you and others deserve will not be forthcoming. We as photographers have been treated in a way that no professional photographer could treat a regular client. By releasing the M8 when it was not 'fit for purpose' Leica has lost considerable credibility amongst customers and potential customers willing them to succeed; I fear they will pay a heavy price for their contempt.

 

Leica pulled a fast one. They dropped a bollock.

 

Sincerely............ChrisC

[ho_co]

HC, ... I genuinely admire the decent traits you exhibited in your original post for this thread, but all week I have felt that your [and others] enthusiasm for certain Leica products was dangerously mis-invested in suppositions about the company itself. ...

Chris--

Thanks for your respect and for your thoughtful analysis.

 

I used to work for Leica. There were a few management shenanigans, but basically the designers and tech people and most of management were honest and up-front. They cared about making a better product, and making it as good as they could. They cared about the 'Leica mystique' and Leica quality.

 

But that was twenty years ago. I didn't realize how much things have changed.

 

I feel kicked in the gut. I trusted the company from personal experience. Up until this event, my answer to your post would have been, "Hey, Chris, I understand, you're right. That's the way most businesses operate. But this is Leica, and they're different."

 

... Leica pulled a fast one. They dropped a bollock.

They did indeed.

 

--HC

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[ChrisC]

Howard,

 

I feel your sadness......Chris

[carstenw]

Howard, do you have some way to find out who the responsible individuals are in this debacle? I sure hope that once the cameras get sorted out, there will be a little cleanup in the ranks. I do not expect that anyone would trust a company which keeps such individuals. I will be combing the news for the fallout, to restore some of my faith in a company which I once believed so strongly in.