Leica knew and asked reviewers to hold back

[MSmelik]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica knows it's customers apparently.

 

They piss on them once by claiming to have released the best digital camera in the world, and the followers will jump up and down with glee .....

 

The camera is introduced, it has a lot of shortcomings, it is by no means as good as they said it would be .... and the followers will jump up and down with glee

 

It's revealed that leica paid or whatever to shut up the reviewers, admitting knowing about the faulty sensors but still distributing the camera, and in the mean time pocketing 4000€ a pop, and the followers jump up and down with glee

 

By now everyone knows that leica has lied and deceited their followers, treating them like a bunch of cauliflowers, and still the followers jump up and down with glee

 

Despite the serious problems Leica still distributes and sells the M8 and the followers still jump up and down with glee

 

People still buy the Leica and upon purcahse jump up and down with glee

 

Leica explains that they know where the problem lies and will fix it soon, and the followers are still jumping up and down with glee ....

 

 

how hard is it to learn a lesson, how many times must you get trodden upon in order to realize that the feeling ain't good ...

 

 

but by all means, ask for patience and cooling down periods, and in the meantime you can all jump up and down with glee ....

[dannirr]

. Before anyone can accue Michael of misleading anyone or being less than objective, please consider that he laid out his own $$$, at fair market value, to buy the very camera he was testing. He's in the same position as every other photographer who mostly loves this machine. .

 

This is simply not true. I quote directly from Michael's M8 review - "Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go argue with Leica USA about returning their test sample. As the saying goes – only from my cold dead hands." He did say he would buy one - but the review was based ona a loaned camera.

 

I was dismayed to read Michael's excuse. Dismayed because he did not disclose the problems he found, and dismayed that he has his reviews vetted by the manufacturer as a matter of standard procedure. I now know that Michael's site is not one to refer to when looking for objective review. It is apparent to me that an honest, open review for his readers (and some, like me, paid VJ subscibers) is not a priority. It simply brings all non-image content on that site into question.

 

This is a pity, because he is certainly a very knowledgable, and more importantly, a very active photographer.

 

Danni

[gumshoecamus]

Hi There - as an experienced buyer of 'unfinished' cameras it seems to me that Leica were in an intolerable position[/url]

 

I agree. when any company sets up a launch [particularly if that company has a reputation for endlessly delaying launches] -- with reviews, editorial, advertising, etc -- it is clearly a huge problem if no product appears. better to release something and get on with the fix.

 

I agree that leica has handled this very poorly, but I don't think there is a conspiracy at leica to deliberately sell us 'faulty' cameras and hope no-one notices. leica probably hoped to release a firmware update and a statement about IR filters before the problems became obvious to early adopters, but seems to have mis-judged the scale of the task. remember that a building digital camera is a huge task compared to building a film camera. I own an MP and it is perfection, but it is also very simple.

 

most electronic products, especially specialist ones like the M8, are beset with problems because engineer's ambitions often conflict with owner's or shareholder's budgets. I bought a hasselblad CFV back (for more than twice the price of the m8 by the way) and when I received it image quality was poor, especially above iso 100. hasselblad were helpful but asked that I wait for upcoming firmware updates. a week later IQ was much better, and now, six months later, it is excellent. phase one (which has a great reputation among MF users) had colour cast problems with its P30 back (it uses a kodak sensor and microlenses too) but C1 upgrades and input from users have mostly solved the problems. the result -- incredible image quality.

 

so decide what you want. if you want everything perfect from day 1, then buy something simple or tried-and-trusted. if you can tolerate teething problems that go hand-in-hand with innovation, or even tolerate risk, then buy something radical and more often than not you will be rewarded.

 

I repeat -- leica has handled this badly. but that is no reason to condemn everyone, including incredibly hard-working and generous contributors like MR and SR, and frighten companies into taking no risks and reviewers into bald, bland MF-chart peeping. at the end of that path lies stagnation.

 

dave

[jonoslack]

yes, but not with a camera known to have show shopping faults for my needs....

 

But not for everyone's needs - I'm in danger of being an apologist, which isn't my intention, but it may easily be that delaying production would have sounded their death knell, whereas doing it this way does not - they seem pretty confident of a fix in their message.

 

Would you rather they had waited if it meant that you NEVER got your M8?

 

kind regards

jono slack

[franklinh]

This posted as member, and not as moderator.

 

I wanted to affirm Michael's work and reviews before I wrote this. So I just paid my "new" subscription" to Michael Reichmann's Luminous Landscape site. I'm putting my money where my mouth is. The post on Luminous Landscape that Leica asked him to withhold parts of his initial review is pure GOLD. Where the heck in this crazy world are you going to get inside information like that......

 

Every new product, now that our cameras are part computers, should come with a Read Me file with a list of known defects.

 

Leica ought to give writers like Brooks Jensen, Sean Reid, and Michael Reichmann access to write the "book" on the inside story of the Leica M8. Sort of a Tracy Kidder "Soul of a New Machine" kind of book for the world of Leica.

 

Looking forword to my DVDs from Luminous Landscape.

 

Franklin

[jonoslack]

I repeat -- leica has handled this badly. but that is no reason to condemn everyone, including incredibly hard-working and generous contributors like MR and SR, and frighten companies into taking no risks and reviewers into bald, bland MF-chart peeping. at the end of that path lies stagnation.

 

dave

I'm not sure that they have handled it that badly - unless, of course, they don't have a fix up their sleeves.

 

I'm not sure what else one could have expected of them - it might have been honest to say "we're putting this camera on the marked, but it doesn't work right" but it would hardly be sensible.

 

My guess is that they thought it would be longer before the shortcomings came to light, and that by the time they HAD come to light, there would already be a fix - at least a firmware fix which radically improved the situation.

 

Their admission has come quickly enough that anyone who wants their money back can have it (and there's others waiting in line who aren't so fussy).

 

Getting angry and throwing things around doesn't seem constructive . . . . . it might be worth mentioning at this point that, although the magenta has not had a lot of impact on my work, the smearing/banding certainly has - I've got it on lots of hight contrast shots - it's a bother to remove.

 

kind regards

jono slack

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It surprised me that they shipped the camera a full month earlier than they said they would as Photokina. That date was widely accepted and they could have spent time refining the WB, maybe addrssing the other imaging problems. Or did they think it was absolutely fine with any issues just an SD card away from Nirvana?

 

The difference here is that it's not at all obvious the problems are just a matter of firmware. The whole IR sensistivity may be hardware not software. How do you reduce a cameras sensitivity to an out of focus IR wash using software?

[Guest stnami]

Leica knew and asked reviewers to hold back,

as for the reviewers so be it, as they were between a rock and a hard place. It was their decision and reputation and they did what they felt was right under the circumstances. Anyway reviews are fluid and change with more information coming to light, not a problem there

 

Mr Devlin did you read your friend's review? .. don't aggravate the situation, a poor cover up.

please consider that he laid out his own $$$, at fair market value,

not according to the article in LL

 

As for Leica, the older generation may forgive you for for dragging the name and reputation in mud. The new generation will see you as a company that didn't cut the mustard, i.e. technologically incompetent,

 

A reputation sullied........

[earleygallery]

I can understand wanting to give Leica a fair shot with their new product but could the review not have said something like "I have found these issues on my pre production camera....I've reported them to Leica who have said that they are still finalising the firmware etc., and will resolve them"

 

If Sean also withheld info he should say so. Either way it must be a bit embarrasing, means he didn't pick up on the faults, which would question the thoroughness of his tests, or if he did withhold the info on request from Leica, it questions the value of his test reports.

[jonoslack]

 

As for Leica, the older generation may forgive you for for dragging the name and reputation in mud. The new generation will see you as a company that didn't cut the mustard, i.e. technologically incompetent,

 

A reputation sullied........

 

If they sort it out and make the M8 the camera we all expect, then this little hiccup will be forgotten - if they don't then I imagine they'll be forgotten.

 

It happened with Nikon over focusing on the D2x, banding on the D200 - as long as the camera is sorted in a reasonable amount of time, then only the 'early adopters' will remember this, and then only with a kind of nostalgic irratation!

 

kind regards

jono slack

[Vivek Iyer]

We need to call these folks by some other name instead of "reviewers".

 

It is clear that they are NOT posting reviews but promotional stuff.

 

I move to rename them as "promoters".

 

If any had refused Leica's "advise" to withhold information, they are unlikely to be considered for the next round of "promotional" prerelease cameras. That much is clear in MR's unapologetic statement that he would do the same thing again if asked by the manufacturer.

[jrgeoffrion]

Business is based on relationships, relationships are based on trust.

 

I see a lot of reference to Canon and Nikon that have released "faulty" cameras -- true, I've owned my share of them. HOWEVER, managing a 'small' company is not like managing a large company. With a small company, certain mistakes just can't be made.

[brunom]

If what many are suggesting is true - what about the Leica dealers - did Leica screw them as well? or were/are they in on it as well?

 

There seems to be a lot of venom about at the moment - I see it all the time here in central London - people driving around and 'waiting' for someone to make some minor error, just so they can hurl abuse at them. It's obviously very prevalent in the camera world too - sadly.

 

Bruno

[Guest stnami]

... maybe we are all waiting for that bus

[prk60091]

I can understand wanting to give Leica a fair shot with their new product but could the review not have said something like "I have found these issues on my pre production camera....I've reported them to Leica who have said that they are still finalising the firmware etc., and will resolve them"

 

If Sean also withheld info he should say so. Either way it must be a bit embarrasing, means he didn't pick up on the faults, which would question the thoroughness of his tests, or if he did withhold the info on request from Leica, it questions the value of his test reports.

 

Deleted comment ABr

[gumshoecamus]

If what many are suggesting is true - what about the Leica dealers - did Leica screw them as well? or were/are they in on it as well?

 

There seems to be a lot of venom about at the moment - I see it all the time here in central London - people driving around and 'waiting' for someone to make some minor error, just so they can hurl abuse at them. It's obviously very prevalent in the camera world too - sadly.

 

Bruno

 

I agree bruno. I live in central london and everyone is just itching to discover malevolence, or even a mistake, in someone else so they can go berserk and make sweeping generalisations about the end of the world. in the UK we call it 'the daily mail tendency'.

 

if the M8 I have had on order since the spring had arrived I too would be bothered about the streaking as most of my work is street photography at 4am. but I would like to think I would not suddenly see the cabal of leica, MR and SR as the root of all that is bad in the world.

 

reminds me of the clinton impeachment. so many people (even in th UK) went loopy over a bit of embarassing oral sex. look who's president now ! [here come those flames!]

 

dave

[Michael Reichmann]

I'll just add one small comments and then bow out of this discussion.

 

Of the 500 odd photographs I took during about a week of testing I only saw the magenta cast issue in 2 images and the green blog issue in 1 image. That's well under 1% of the shots take.

 

I was therefore loath to mention the problems because I felt that they might have been anomolies that others might not encounter, and I didn't have the benefit then of hindsight in now knowing the nature of the problem.

 

I did identify the low light level white balance issue and also the excessive IR sensativity and discussed them in the review.

 

Asking a manufacturer for feedback on a review, particularly with regard to potential factual errors is the norm. Most reputable reviewers do this as a matter of course.

 

Leica appropriately asked me to hold off on some of the problems that I saw, because, I believed, they wanted to identify whether these were anomolies or systemic. A fair request. I gave them the benefit of the doubt.

 

In any event, my enthusiasm for the M8 is undeminished and I did end up purchasing one for myself, even knowing what I did. So anyone that feels I deceived them has to accept that I did so without malintent, since I put my own money where my pen is.

 

Michael

[devils-advocate]

This is simply not true. I quote directly from Michael's M8 review - "Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go argue with Leica USA about returning their test sample. As the saying goes – only from my cold dead hands." He did say he would buy one - but the review was based ona a loaned camera.

 

 

I am sorry if my original post was unclear. Michael reviewed a loaner camera, and then bought the camera, notwithstanding (or more accurately, because of) what he saw come out of it. My point was simply that his actions bespeak a trust that any issues will in fact be solved, as he is just another M8 owner like the rest of us. I gather the same applies to Sean, who's bought two of them.

 

My only point is that these guys are photographers like the rest of us,pay-to-play like the rest of us, have their own investment in these cameras, and approached their reviews and sharing of information in good faith.

 

First we take pictures with cameras. Then we talk about taking pictures with cameras. Then we just talk about cameras. Then we talk abouut talking about cameras, and to bring the whole viciously post-modernist cycle to its logical end, we conclude by talking about the people who talk about cameras. Can we return to step #1 now, please?

[alexr]

This story has little to do with technical flaws and all to do with commercialism, management and modern company-press relationships.

The reviewers:

The problem is that these people (LL, SR etc) just like motor journalists (an area which is plagued by this problem), need to play nice. If they don-t, they don't get the new equipment early enough. And if that does not happen their sites became fairly useless.

But. There is a limit. And LL, SR etc went beyond this limit. If product x from the company you are in bed with (and they are in bed with all of them) has issues you either:

a)hold on to the review (what Phil did at DPR)

b)publish and say there are unresolved issues (which is no real option cause as soon as you do that you get swamped by readers who wanna know what the hell these issues are)

 

The practice of letting the manufacturer read your story before you publish is, sadly, common. Still absolutely wrong though.

 

I think in the end Phil acted in a (fairly) correct journalistic way (by today's standards). A real journalist would of course publish what he knows when he knows it. There are some of those still around but they are rare.

 

I work for a travel magazine. We do not accept freebies. We only put hotels/restaurants etc we have chosen and tested in person and WE like. This practice is so rare now that all over the world the owners of these establishments cannot believe it. I have actually been refused entry in some places cause even though i have told them there is no catch, no one from our advertising dept will follow up and so on, the managers did not believe it could be true. This is how corrupt the travel journalism industry is. Honest pros not allowed to work honestly cause the companies cannot believe a honest pro still exists!

From their point of view, it is understandable. If they give you a free week in their hotel (plus the usual gifts they will place in your room), they feel they are controlling you. If you pay, then what-s to prevent you from writing that their hotel is rubbish? Better not let you in at all.

 

Back to the issue at hand. The MAJOR culprit here is Leica, not the more or less professional/ethical reviewers. Leica knew and went ahead, possibly under pressure from management. Still, considering that we had waited patiently for the M8 for years, more waiting would have been acceptable (if the reasons were communicated efficiently). The Co. is uniquely lucky to have an absurdly loyal customer-base (so much sometimes it feels like a religious sect), it is unbelievable they would chose to treat them like this.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[brunom]

Michael

 

Thanks for the clarification - you were in a difficult position and I for one accept you did what you thought was best at the time . Hindsight is a wonderful thing !

 

Bruno