Joseph Reid Posted September 10, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) After the M9 unveiling yesterday I spoke with Leica Camera CEO Rudi Spiller. The transcript is on my blog. I couldn't ask everything forum members suggested but I hope some of his answers are interesting anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 10, 2009 Posted September 10, 2009 Hi Joseph Reid, Take a look here Leica CEO on M9 quality control & Leica's future. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
efftee Posted September 10, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 10, 2009 Thanks. Did Spiller specifically mention Singapore? Sad to say, no M9 here yet! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
danyves Posted September 10, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 10, 2009 In Leica's Big Day I see that >>the top ISO rating of 2500 on the M9 could increase in the future with firmware upgrade<< More than interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Reid Posted September 10, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted September 10, 2009 "In Leica's Big Day I see that >>the top ISO rating of 2500 on the M9 could increase in the future with firmware upgrade<< More than interesting." Yes, that's one of the things Stefan Daniel said. I'll be transcribing that interview and posting it later today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted99 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #5 Posted September 10, 2009 Sorry to bring this up, but the base-plate-body-failure problem is not solved. At least so far as i can se when looking in to the camera when the base- plate is removed. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/72207-base-plate-body-failure.html Therefore I will not bye the M9. I have my M8 in Solms of that reason waiting to have it back next week. It seems that it is very difficult to bring the parts back together again after á failure like this. Anyway Leica have really did the best to put the camera together again after the base-plate-failure but it will come again soon or later. The connection to the body is simply to week. I think it is quite simple to make the connection stronger, so please fix it.......... Ted Ernhill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlmuck Posted September 10, 2009 Share #6 Posted September 10, 2009 Sorry to bring this up, but the base-plate-body-failure problem is not solved.At least so far as i can se when looking in to the camera when the base- plate is removed. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/72207-base-plate-body-failure.html Therefore I will not bye the M9. I have my M8 in Solms of that reason waiting to have it back next week. It seems that it is very difficult to bring the parts back together again after á failure like this. Anyway Leica have really did the best to put the camera together again after the base-plate-failure but it will come again soon or later. The connection to the body is simply to week. I think it is quite simple to make the connection stronger, so please fix it.......... Ted Ernhill "Baseplate failure" ??? ... the camera was dropped... doesn't sound like a failure to me, more like abuse... If the damage happened simply with a lens mounted and no external force, I'd buy "failure" but this ain't that. If you don't want to by an M9, great, but this "problem" shouldn't be part of the equation. c. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreas_thomsen Posted September 10, 2009 Share #7 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) i got mine this morning. ....this time the early adopters are in a great position. i am shure every M9 is double checked in solms. cheers andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaman94044 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #8 Posted September 10, 2009 Tell that to Lloyd Chambers, Andy! Banding in two different areas of his sensor, visible at all iso's. M9 images - The GetDPI Workshop Forums Post's 37 to 71. Supposedly there were 120 testers of this camera and it was released with a firmware that causes red blotchiness in shadow areas (visible in many of the posted photos) and an overall red cast in images. If this is reassuring to you... I'm happy for you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted99 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #9 Posted September 10, 2009 The camera was not dropped, only á slight miss when I was working with the Leica original ball-head and the Leica table-tripod. Lens 90/2,8, everything in the margins of normal way to work with the equipment. The camera has absolutely no sign of dropping . Leica accepted to repair the camera for free. Should have mention this in the first place, missed that. /T Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted September 10, 2009 Share #10 Posted September 10, 2009 "Baseplate failure" ??? ... the camera was dropped... doesn't sound like a failure to me, more like abuse... If the damage happened simply with a lens mounted and no external force, I'd buy "failure" but this ain't that. If you don't want to by an M9, great, but this "problem" shouldn't be part of the equation. c. Sorry but you are totally mistaken. Here's the link to the first such report and many pages with other users having the same problem. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/25121-base-plate-failure.html In the case of the poster to this thread that you quoted he said the camera Feel off the tripod and hit the ground. Not that he dropped the camera or tripod to the ground. Please read all of the posts before you make a reply. Yes I have done this also so now to do try to read the complete post and or thread before I make any reply. I too am not happy about the placement of the baseplate lock. I really think Leica should of moved it to the inside of the body like on film M's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 10, 2009 Share #11 Posted September 10, 2009 Tell that to Lloyd Chambers, Andy! Banding in two different areas of his sensor, visible at all iso's. M9 images - The GetDPI Workshop Forums Post's 37 to 71. Supposedly there were 120 testers of this camera and it was released with a firmware that causes red blotchiness in shadow areas (visible in many of the posted photos) and an overall red cast in images. If this is reassuring to you... I'm happy for you. Get the facts right at least. Lloyd's body doesn't have "banding", ok? It has a defective sensor that exhibits lines from dead pixels. I had the same thing on my M8 (and have had one from Canon too) and so have many other people. Industrial processes are not perfect processes. When something is defective, it needs to be replaced. I'm sure Lloyd's is in the process; unfortunately supplies are limited right now. As for the color being off, give us a break please. Plenty of other cameras (DMR, M8, every Canon ever made) has had crummy color out of the box until the RAW manufacturers support it OR you use the company's own RAW converter (which for a lot of people won't cut it for other reasons). Everyone knows Leica isn't a software company, so they rely on others to get stuff right. Looks like Adobe got it wrong so far... but that will change too. Early adopters know this. Wait for a few firmwares before you judge the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaman94044 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #12 Posted September 10, 2009 Put the coffee down Jamie. LJL stated on the same thread "They are getting a lot better, but still some kinks to get worked out. Not unlike some of the banding issues that Nikon had before they got things smoothed out." That's where I got the banding term. So it's a line. I stand corrected. You called it a defective sensor. That's quite a bit more severe as banding can be corrected with software... a defective sensor can't. I didn't condemn the camera to death by referring to the post of an experienced camera tester on another forum. Get your facts straight! I simply pointed out that there are issues that needed to be ironed out. There is this herd mentality among many on these forums that has them running out to buy new cameras before the waiting list gets too long. The early adopters are the ones who suffer the inconvenience of having to wait months for their equipment to return from Solms when an issue that was undetected by early testers becomes common. My comment was directed at Andres who stated "....this time the early adopters are in a great position. i am shure every M9 is double checked in solms", or did you miss that? Or are you implying that a defective sensor fits within that "double checked" category? Better to wait for problems to be resolved (prior to purchasing the M) than be without a camera for an interminable amount of time. That point should have been stated in my post... but I thought it redundant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #13 Posted September 10, 2009 banding................my favorite word Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted September 10, 2009 Share #14 Posted September 10, 2009 Sorry to bring this up, but the base-plate-body-failure problem is not solved. Ted, the same thought went through my mind when I read the M9 description. But Leica has recognized there may be a problem with the materials, and someone, I think Stefan Daniel, said publicly on the forum that Leica would check each broken body casting individually. IIRC, at the time only four or five bodies had shown the problem; Leica had billed for repairs on only one of them; after they became aware of "the problem" via the forum, they refunded the repair charges for that one. I think you're right that it's inherent in the design and materials used, and that it will happen again. For most of us, the problem will likely never appear. And if it does, Leica will take the design and materials into account when deciding whether the repair is billable. I'm sorry you were bitten, but I'm not going to let such a low-likelihood failure influence my purchase decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.