[Leica] Re: M8-not ready for Prime Time (a long and sorrowfullament)

[faneuil at gmail.com (Eric Korenman)]

Love my M8.
Has performed stunningly well and beyond my expectations.
Knock wood.

Eric

On 5/6/07, Jeffery Smith <jsmith342@cox.net> wrote:
>
> When it fails intermittently, it's like a dog that acts sick at home but
> behaves wonderfully at the vet. When it fails intermittently, my first
> impression is that it is a software glitch. I do wonder just how much time
> this camera was beta-tested before send it out to market.
>
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> http://www.400tx.com
> http://400tx.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
> Lawrence
> Zeitlin
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 2:33 PM
> To: lug@leica-users.org
> Subject: [Leica] Re: M8-not ready for Prime Time (a long and
> sorrowfullament)
>
>
> I don't know what percentage of the LUG owns M8 cameras but a number
> of Luggers have complained about glitches, inadequacies, and outright
> failures. While it is true that the squeeky wheel gets the most
> grease, I too would be more than a little pissed if my long awaited
> Leica camera was defective. Arbitrarily assuming that 10% of the LUG
> has purchased the M8 and that only a dozen buyers are unsatisfied,
> that's a failure rate of about 6%. Far too great for a $5000 prestige
> camera.
>
> But why so many complaints about a new digital camera when older
> Leicas are cherished for their reliability. It's the difference
> between mechanical and electronic product failure characteristics.
>
> If correctly designed and manufactured, mechanical devices fail
> primarily as a function of wear, usually expressed as the number of
> duty cycles. Back when the M Leicas were introduced, Leica was proud
> of the fact that the cameras were designed for 250,000 exposures
> while competing cameras were only expected to last 150,000 to 200,000
> exposures. But parts rub against each other, springs weaken,
> lubrication wears out and use takes its toll. As these processes take
> place, performance gradually deteriorates to the point where the user
> notices it. End of life is reached when parts can no longer be
> adjusted to bring the camera up to specifications. But, except in a
> few rare instances (i.e. the camera being dropped on a concrete floor
> or submerged in salt water), the cameras fail gracefully and present
> few surprises to the user.
>
> Solid state electronic devices, after the initial burn in period,
> have a long and indeterminate life span. I say indeterminate because
> individual components tend fail randomly as a function of conditions
> of operation. The closer to the rated voltage and current limits, the
> shorter the MTBF. If the unit is designed conservatively and
> components are operated well within specifications, the electronics
> can last a long, long time, independent of the number of duty cycles.
> But when the electronic device fails, it usually does so abruptly.
> One day it works, the next it stops working. There is no graceful
> failure here - more like catastrophic.
>
> The M8 is positioned between both groups. It has mechanical parts,
> switches, moving optical elements, focus cams, and shutter. It also
> has electronics, microprocessor, CCD, LEDs and batteries (which have
> a limited life based on the number of recharge cycles). The
> mechanicals may fail gracefully, the electronics catastrophically.
> Most of the complaints on the LUG are about electronic glitches since
> the mechanical elements have not had much of a chance to wear out.
>
> When I worried about hi tech reliability in aerospace equipment for a
> living, we had a test and quality control department almost as big as
> the engineering department. In fact the engineering department
> usually objected to strenuous test and evaluation procedures on the
> grounds that no rational person would abuse their precious equipment
> or operate it outside of its design limits. But it's hard to repair a
> failure on an unmanned space vehicle a million miles from earth. The
> equipment was tested in every possible environment and subjected to
> both physical and electrical abuse. If something broke it was
> redesigned and fixed.
>
> It is apparent that Leica skimped on testing and evaluation before
> pushing the M8 out the door. It is a camera clearly designed by
> technicians for technicians. I don't need to run through the litany
> of problems all of which will be corrected "any time now." They
> should have been detected and corrected before the cameras were
> shipped. Apparently Leica marketing hoped that buyers would pay a
> high entry fee to act as "beta" test evaluators. The only way they
> could get away with that strategy is to repair and replace
> malfunctioning equipment immediately, studying the failed equipment
> to determine its weak spots. Instead broken M8s apparently while away
> months in Solms and New Jersey.
>
> In April my dealer lent me an M8 for a week. I didn't experience any
> catastrophic failures but the camera did lock up once and required a
> battery removal for a reset. If you looked closely there was slight
> evidence of banding and magenta shift and the white balance was a but
> off. Battery life was much shorter than I am used to on digital
> cameras. I could live with all this if the pictures were indeed
> exceptional but they didn't appear to be significantly better than
> any other high end digital camera (heresy). For me, the joy of using
> my Leica lenses on a digital RF camera was not worth the purchase
> price. I returned the camera and reluctantly cancelled my order. I'll
> wait until the M8.1 or perhaps the M9, hoping that Leica gets it right.
>
> Finally I disagree with the philosophy that you show support for a
> company by buying an inadequate product. In business, as in life, you
> get what you reward. Hold Leica's feet to the fire and make them
> deliver the hoped for "perfect" digital M. In the meantime I continue
> to use my highly reliable, predictable, superb quality M3 cameras
> with real film. The lenses fit the older cameras just fine.
>
> Larry Z
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>