So what about scratched M9 LCD screens?

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, I expect Leica will be able to point to cameras in 5 years time with all the paint worn off and say, see, told you, the screen glass is more durable than the paint finish. Which isn't saying much.

 

Jono, I accept you have had contact with Leica during your evaluation and conversations which you can't reveal. from the outside, it looks to me like unfortunate cost cutting.

[jonoslack]

Yes, I expect Leica will be able to point to cameras in 5 years time with all the paint worn off and say, see, told you, the screen glass is more durable than the paint finish. Which isn't saying much.

 

Jono, I accept you have had contact with Leica during your evaluation and conversations which you can't reveal. from the outside, it looks to me like unfortunate cost cutting.

 

Hi Mark

I don't have any insight into this beyond Stefan Daniel's 'perhaps' remark and some common sense.

 

Like you I'd much rather have sapphire glass, I think it's a little unkind to call it unfortunate cost cutting though - there could be lots of other things (like availability etc.). I can't see any possible reason why they wouldn't offer it as an upgrade later on though. I can imagine the meeting, can't you?

 

I have mixed feelings about the finish on the cameras - perhaps they should just cut the crap and use the sort of stuff that Nikon etc. use on their current bodies, it seems to be almost indestructible. I rather like brassy cameras though I was just looking at Silas's FM2, it's great. My black chrome M8 looks nice too (grey now) but I think I'd rather have the brass.

[Gismoto]

 

I asked for a sapphire glass upgrade for the M9, Leica support though answered that's "technically not possible.".

 

I also contacted Leica (Germany) to ask for the sapphire glass and they stated the same thing as on the FAQ document: currently not offered but will be if high request. So everyone who is interested, please contact Leica's support to show them that there is an interest. I will not buy a M9 before a sapphire is offered or it is clear that an upgrade is available.

[BKK dan]

Jono!

 

It is good to see that you will be among the first ones to line up for a sapphire glass upgrade once offered. Hope to meet you there pretty soon!

 

It's actually very simple. If Leica would be more concerned about perception and brand building, they'd emphasize longevity, durability, top quality.

 

Marginally less profit in the end can mean more profit, it's as simple as that.

 

Plastic doesn't stand for top quality, especially since sapphire glass was introduced already and - secondly - since many less expensive alternatives are available.

 

Prices of used digital Ms are already deplorable compared to film Ms.

 

Would Leica though keep up with its tradition and reputation of ever lasting hardware, well, expect prices of used digital Ms to keep a better value.

 

I think it's not a healthy attitude to accept whatever Leica produces. If a product is clearly "incomplete," even though it doesn't affect image quality per se, it is the duty of the even most loyalist crowd to point the finger at a weakness.

 

I'm not talking about any camera. But about the camera that promises to shoot the perfect image. That requires a perfect hardware. Plastic is subsub-perfect.

 

I heard Leica is listening to feedback of its loyal customers.

 

Let's see.

 

Me too, I won't buy an M9 before sapphire glass or an adequate alternative is offered. I don't intend to keep the camera for only 2-3 years. And it hurts my eyes to see a cheap 3rd party something on a multi-thousand-dollar beauty.

[Guest EarlBurrellPhoto]

Leaving out the better protected LCD cover is therefore more of a marketing thing.

 

Yes, and a dumb one, typical of Leica's old habits which I would have thought they'd have got past by now. They really need to define once and for all what image they want to project, and then stick with it. They crow "uncompromising quality" and then take a step backward on something that actually supports the claim, citing cost-economy as a reason.

 

I asked for a sapphire glass upgrade for the M9, Leica support though answered that's "technically not possible."

 

Wonder what that means.

 

It means it's coming in a year or less, but you'll have to pay extra for it. At PMA a few months ago, according to Leica a full-frame M9 was technically impossible. Obviously they didn't suddenly discover that technology and whip together the M9 since then.

[hammam]

Screen Patronus.

 

I'd bet the farm that in a year or so, Leica will offer a M9.2 «upgrade» with sapphire screen and a little top LCD to check battery status and number of shots, plus some obscure new function thrown in for the sake of it. And you will have to fork another $1,000 for that. Haven't we seen it before?

[erl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Screen Patronus.

 

I'd bet the farm that in a year or so, Leica will offer a M9.2 «upgrade» with sapphire screen and a little top LCD to check battery status and number of shots, plus some obscure new function thrown in for the sake of it. And you will have to fork another $1,000 for that. Haven't we seen it before?

 

An interesting bet. Also it would be interesting to know the 'split' of actual users to date that are happy or unhappy with the previous LCD top screen removed and the more accurate info via the back screen, along with the 'standard' screen cover.

 

Personally, as stated in other threads, I don't miss the inclusion of sapphire glass, because over three years of M8 use it has never been a problem for me. The money is better in my pocket at present. The argument against plastic seems a bit thin when you consider the amount of plastic that no one objects, AFAIK, to when it replaces previously metal parts on cars and similar examples.

 

Regarding the small LCD, I do miss its immediacy, such as checking the camera as rushing out the door etc., but cope well enough with the alternative which is more accurate and readable in the dark which is a big plus for me in many situations.

 

On balance I feel the pluses out weigh the minuses, at least for me. Of course this is an individual preference and there will never be a consensus on it.

 

As for "what we have seen before". Well that's just how life works. And after 'that' will come more and more......... don't look for an end to it. That is life all over. Dive in now. The water's fine!

[BKK dan]

One can only wish Leica a lot of success with the M9.

 

After the initial wave of early adopters have their cameras, there will be a lull, and most probably Leica will issue editions, such as with the M8, to expand sales.

 

Maybe they refine the concept of digital M editions and not only launch different colors.

 

As I understand from reading through all relevant sites the old "standard" screen on the M9 doesn't really make much sense even for "established" prominent Leica shooters.

 

David Farkas writes he "like(s) this feature on (his) M8.2":

 

David Farkas Photography Blog: Leica M9 Review: Shooting in Wetzlar, Germany

 

Michael Reichmann politely evades the issue in his interview with Stefan Daniel, even though it's clear he'd like to follow up.

 

Ken Rockwell implies the M9 is the not perfect camera as no sapphire glass "leaves the door open for an improved M9":

 

LEICA M9

 

User threads on the issue? Many.

 

For you out there who doesn't care about this intentional omission of better quality I say "way to go, you concentrate on the basics."

 

Others please write to Leica and kindly ask for a glass upgrade.

 

Leica for sure is very well aware that they could have delivered the goods from the very beginning without a major impact on price or profit margin.

[erl]

snipped

 

Leica for sure is very well aware that they could have delivered the goods from the very beginning without a major impact on price or profit margin.

 

Just your last statement I am unable to agree with Dan. We don't know what impact the sapphire screen has on cost, but we can 'guess' it will impact it upwards. That would have been close to disqualifying me from purchasing. As it is, I now have an M9. I am one happy camper.

[BKK dan]

Just your last statement I am unable to agree with Dan. We don't know what impact the sapphire screen has on cost, but we can 'guess' it will impact it upwards. That would have been close to disqualifying me from purchasing. As it is, I now have an M9. I am one happy camper.

 

It's part of Leica's main biz to produce glass (lenses). Leica has other options than cheaper plastic.

 

Again, one can't compare Leica with the competition, because there's basically no competition.

 

But the competition offers solutions and as not 100% of the M9 is manufactured in Germany there are options.

 

Leica itself has some flexibility in determining the final price.

 

For instance in Singapore the price is roughly the same as in Germany. But Singapore has a GST of 7%, Germany of over 19%.

 

That's a major difference. A 12% higher profit margin (excluding freight) from M9s sold in Singapore?

 

With the low U.S. dollar cameras become even cheaper in the U.S.

 

I don't buy the argument that cost pressure determined the omission of sapphire glass.

 

It's mainly marketing, and that leaves a sour taste.

[marknorton]

Sapphire glass is expensive, there's no denying that, but the M8 upgrade pricing suggested it was about the same as the new shutter. If you then say that both the glass and the rear clamshell casting are replaced, the cost of the glass might only be €150 - €200 where the cost of the upgrade will likely be more than €1000 because of the extra shipping, labour, warranty and general messing about.

[erl]

Dan, what you say may be true, especially the marketing. But that is exactly what a manufacturing company has to do. Extract maximum dollar for minimum cost, taking into account the level of quality they wish to set as standard. How Leica set the balance on those three factors I don't know. All I know is what is offered. If enough of us accept it, it is successful. If enough of of us reject it, it is a failure.

[hammam]

Just your last statement I am unable to agree with Dan. We don't know what impact the sapphire screen has on cost, but we can 'guess' it will impact it upwards. That would have been close to disqualifying me from purchasing. As it is, I now have an M9. I am one happy camper.

 

How do we know that? How do we know the profit margin Leica make on each M9? How do we know if a sapphire glass would have «impacted» the sale price, and by how much? My guess is it would have just cut a tiny bit on the profit margin, not a bad price to pay for Leica to avoid the bad M8 image starting all over again (first sell an imperfect M8, then release an «improved» M8.2 for another $1,000 a year later.) Same with the top LCD. That's just my opinion.

[brill64]

i think that you're forgetting 09/09/09 as the unmissable marketing release date. saphire glass will surely come but maybe not in time for that. i also recall early on someone saying that it would have taken until 2010 before seeing the s2 chip ready to use in a ff m camera. it's all a question of marketing. the spare parts have to be manufactured to schedule and come from somewhere before they can be used. i doubt the newly formatted glass plates could have been ready in time and besides that, why include them now when you'll pay extra to have them fitted at a later date? i agree with erl, enjoy the m9 for what it offers you right here and now...if you can get your hands on one that is

[bill]

Why should Leica behave any differently from any other company?

 

"This is the product we will sell now - it has x features. Those are not all the features we can cram into it, because if we did it would be too expensive and we would have no room to improve it. We will sell it until demand tails off and we can no longer make money doing so."

 

Then...

 

"This is the new improved product we will sell in the future - it has x features AND y features. It is therefore better than the previous product and people will buy it to get the better features."

 

...and so on.

 

Why is this so hard for people to get their heads around? It's business.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[hammam]

Why should Leica behave any differently from any other company?

 

"This is the product we will sell now - it has x features. Those are not all the features we can cram into it, because if we did it would be too expensive and we would have no room to improve it. We will sell it until demand tails off and we can no longer make money doing so."

 

Then...

 

"This is the new improved product we will sell in the future - it has x features AND y features. It is therefore better than the previous product and people will buy it to get the better features."

 

...and so on.

 

Why is this so hard for people to get their heads around? It's business.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Exactly my point. There is business, then there is bad business. This, in my view, is bad business. It tarnishes Leica's image again, because they've done it before with the M8. M4 to M6 is evolution. M6 to M6 TTL is evolution. M6 TTL to M7 is evolution. M8 to M8.2, at a price, or M9 without sapphire glass to M9 with sapphire glass is not evolution. It's taking advantage of enthusiastic customers.

[wlaidlaw]

My personal view is that the LCD as a whole is a bit disappointing. LCD technology has moved a long way in three years but time seems to have stood still in Solms. Even low cost consumer items such as the new Zune are now using OLED screens. I am not too worried about the absence of Sapphire glass and will just go back to using a film but a 500,000 pixel OLED screen with a hardened polycarbonate cover + oleophobic coating (as per iPhone 3GS) would have been nice.

 

Wilson

[BKK dan]

There is an upgrade in the pipeline, for sure.

 

Maybe for next fiscal year, or if M9 demand keeps on being strong for next Photokina.

 

My guess though is that supply will outdo demand in about February, so expect an upgraded M9 sometime in April or so.

 

Let's not forget Leica planned the M9 in the middle of the financial meltdown. Every penny became important.

 

Again, they should launch 1 single thought-through complete M9. But yes, that's marketing, and that's why I don't buy the current basic M9, as great as the camera is and as excited people are.

 

The wait is cumbersome, yes, but I waited for worse things to come. The more content I will be.

 

One can only speculate what other minor goodies Leica will include.

[Overgaard]

Sapphire glass will appear, no doubt about it. I would get it if I could, and at the point Leica introduces it all will agree it's the way it should be. But it will probbaly be an extra which we will be willing to pay for in retroperspective, but would't have been willing to pay extra for by the introduction. So in a way it's quite wise to secure that profit margin because it's matter of market price compared to production cost. And Leica shouln't be a non-profit company. We should be thankfull as it is that Kaufmann has secured a Leica that is even spending money on R&D.

 

Doing as now, getting FF on the market that sell like hot cakes, that's what was needed. Adding perfection in sappire and extra price would have slowed down sales.

 

Many Leica users are about perfection, so they (we) will pay for it when available.

 

Mine haven't gotten any scratches, but my bottom plate got plenty

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[john_newell]

My personal view is that the LCD as a whole is a bit disappointing. LCD technology has moved a long way in three years but time seems to have stood still in Solms. Even low cost consumer items such as the new Zune are now using OLED screens. I am not too worried about the absence of Sapphire glass and will just go back to using a film but a 500,000 pixel OLED screen with a hardened polycarbonate cover + oleophobic coating (as per iPhone 3GS) would have been nice.

 

Wilson

 

I agree. Getting torqued up about sapphire glass when a $10 screen protector will do the same thing is, ehhhm, surprising. I'm not sure Leica needed to go to OLED screens, but honestly, a size upgrade using LCD technology would have been very useful. The 2.5" screen is barely adequate for anything more than reading menu settings.