RE: [Leica] Re: quality control

[Tom.Henson@bakerbotts.com]

Jim,

I have to agree with Seth. While it is indeed true that today's technology
makes reporting these problems to a very wide audience almost instantaneous,
my experience with Leica Solms has not been the best.

I purchased three new Leica lenses in the last two months: a 28-70mm vario
(current version), a 80-200mm vario (current version) and a 100mm 2.8 APO
(current version).

I had to send the 28-70mm back three times to get a decent lens; 80-200mm
twice, 100mm 2.8 APO three times (never got a good one).

In the end all three lenses were replaced by Leica USA. The 28-70mm and the
80-200mm were hand selected by their quality control people and turned out
to be good enough to keep. The 100mm APO was sent to Solms to have the
serial number transferred off the bad lens onto a newly manufactured lens
that was to be hand selected by the quality control people in Solms, and
then returned to me via Leica NJ.

When I received the 100mm APO back it was not only worse than the one I sent
in, the back of the lens was all scratched up with screw driver marks where
it had been dis-assembled and not even touched up. There were finger prints
all over the lens, and the plastic bag that I had shipped it in was not even
returned (I had sent box, pouch, plastic bag). I  ended up sending this lens
back to Leica NJ, and Brenda Olesin was so embarrassed she offered me a full
refund on the lens.

I have an email from her confirming that Leica Solms was going to send me a
brand new hand selected lens, if anyone would like a copy I will be glad to
send it to them off line for a "reference".

Does this sound like a company that occasionally sends out a bad product?

Tom Henson


- -----Original Message-----
From: Jim Brick [mailto:jim_brick@agilent.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 3:58 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us; leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: [Leica] Re: quality control


I'm not sure that what you say is true Seth. First, there was no LUG or LEG
or any other world wide e-mail instant information users groups back in the
days of Leitz. You are equating problems that LUGgers have had with Solms
vs problems with equipment out of Leitz. To quote a recent mantra, "what is
your source of information and how reliable is it?" I strongly suspect
extrapolated hearsay.

He said she said...

Any company that uses human beings to manufacture a product will have a
certain percentage of failures that actually make it out the door. From
Yugo to Rolls Royce, from Petri to Leica, from hang gliders to Space
Shuttles.

I will bet that Leica's faux pas are still in the same percentage as
Leitz's faux pas. Only they are more visible now. Leica's faux pas may even
be less.

Sort of like war. Now there are TV cameras on the front lines so that the
world can see everything as it happens. During WW-I or WW-II the world
didn't have a clue and only selected information ever got out.

Jim

At 03:54 PM 5/18/01 -0400, SthRosner@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 5/17/01 4:42:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
>henry@henryambrose.com writes:
>
><< The new Leica lenses are the best lenses ever made. >>
>
>Henry, you must not be reading the unsettling reports of quality control 
>problems a lot of LUGGERS are having with brand-new equipment out of Solms.

>While on very rare occasion a piece of equipment had to be returned or 
>repaired, there was never this level of frightening quality problems from 
>Leitz Wetzlar. Contact Tom.Henson@baker botts.com who has reported his
horror 
>stories here.
>
>Seth  LaK 9