Corrosion here....
Old 05-17-2017   #81
DwF
Registered User
 
DwF's Avatar
 
DwF is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,011
Corrosion here....

On Monday, a friend who'd just seen the notice from Leica, forwarded it to me while I was at work. That evening I did a check of a recent image with lots of sky to see whether my sensor was clean. It looked just fine, but then I decided to check carefully and, making an exposure of our overcast sky yesterday morning I found spots w haloing at the lower part of the sensor. I wrote to Leica with pics attached and was told they will do a replacement at no charge. I will be sending my camera in today or tomorrow.

David
__________________
DwF DwF’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #82
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlu19 View Post
I just read the free sensor replacement offer is ending in August 2017. Would Leica take a look at my M9P even if I don't see a sensor problem with it?
Yes they will, just send it in for a sensor clean and check.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #83
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwF View Post
On Monday, a friend who'd just seen the notice from Leica, forwarded it to me while I was at work. That evening I did a check of a recent image with lots of sky to see whether my sensor was clean. It looked just fine, but then I decided to check carefully and, making an exposure of our overcast sky yesterday morning I found spots w haloing at the lower part of the sensor. I wrote to Leica with pics attached and was told they will do a replacement at no charge. I will be sending my camera in today or tomorrow.

David
David,

Glad you got in. Basically you get a free overhaul CLA as part of the deal. Hopefully the wait is not long for you.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #84
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,033
Remember that the 'free' service is not being cancelled for cameras bought new up to five years before August. September 2017 marks the fifth year since the M typ 240 replaced the M9/M9-P; the MM stayed in production until 2013 and the M-E until 2015, so there's plenty of time for those who own those cameras but have not yet seen the issue surface.

Moving to a paid service for cameras older than that after August makes sense as it provides full refurbishment support services (with factory warranty!) for obsoleted, aging cameras that, from any other manufacturer, would be retired or replaced if they malfunctioned.

No other manufacturer has offered such extensive warranty and paid remedial services for older cameras that I know of.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #85
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,191
In terms of service with warranty experience, in 2016 Canon stopped support (with warranty) for 5D cameras from 2005 to 2008. Eight years after camera was discontinued. No service at all. But Leica will still take care on M8 (2006-2008?), just not all of the parts now available.

I just can't recall any other manufacturer with bad and major component as the sensor is. Well, no actual recall was actually ever made.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #86
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post

No other manufacturer has offered such extensive warranty and paid remedial services for older cameras that I know of.

G
Has any other manufacturer knowingly continued to sell cameras with defective sensors?
I never would have bought my M-E if I knew about this.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #87
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Has any other manufacturer knowingly continued to sell cameras with defective sensors?
I never would have bought my M-E if I knew about this.
Leica didn't know, or intend to sell knowingly, cameras with a bad sensor. The corrosion problem surfaced and was verified in late 2014 with M9 bodies, two years AFTER the M9 was already discontinued, and AFTER the M-E the M typ 240 were released and available for purchase. Instead of discontinuing sale of the M-E cameras, due to the demand for them, they created a repair program to permanently correct the problem for them and for all the earlier models that exhibit the problem as well.

I can't understand how you can fault them for verifying the problem and coming up with a factory-authorized permanent fix. It probably cost them a heck of a lot more than just taking the cameras off the market and buying up all the older models that many many users still want and love.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #88
DwF
Registered User
 
DwF's Avatar
 
DwF is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
David,

Glad you got in. Basically you get a free overhaul CLA as part of the deal. Hopefully the wait is not long for you.

Cal
Thank you! me too -very good news. I will keep the thread posted as to how long I am without. I love my MM so I will be happy to have it with a new lease on life

David
__________________
DwF DwF’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #89
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
Leica didn't know, or intend to sell knowingly, cameras with a bad sensor. The corrosion problem surfaced and was verified in late 2014 with M9 bodies, two years AFTER the M9 was already discontinued, and AFTER the M-E the M typ 240 were released and available for purchase. Instead of discontinuing sale of the M-E cameras, due to the demand for them, they created a repair program to permanently correct the problem for them and for all the earlier models that exhibit the problem as well.

I can't understand how you can fault them for verifying the problem and coming up with a factory-authorized permanent fix. It probably cost them a heck of a lot more than just taking the cameras off the market and buying up all the older models that many many users still want and love.

G
Seeing my sensor in the M-E, which had been in production for years already in the M9, went bad in 4 months after I bought it new, you really think that Leica didn't know about this for years? Really?

FYI I never wet cleaned it. And it was stored in a dry box between use. And I live in Los Angeles, not some overtly humid climate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #90
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwF View Post
Thank you! me too -very good news. I will keep the thread posted as to how long I am without. I love my MM so I will be happy to have it with a new lease on life

David
David,

I too am on the pleased side of the coin, but I understand why others might not be pleased.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #91
Luke_Miller
Registered User
 
Luke_Miller's Avatar
 
Luke_Miller is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Rural Virginia
Posts: 129
In the poll regarding sensor corrosion

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...corrosion+poll

68 respondents had not experienced sensor corrosion

41 respondents had experienced sensor corrosion, and

15 were not sure

Even if you add the "not sure" to the "had experienced" group, a majority of respondents were unaffected. So it is by no means assured that a MM, M9 or M-E body with its original sensor will eventually experience corrosion.

It is also possible that the group who responded to the poll is not representative of users of those bodies as a whole. With those experiencing corrosion more likely to respond than those who had not.
__________________
http://lukemiller.photos
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #92
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Seeing my sensor in the M-E, which had been in production for years already in the M9, went bad in 4 months after I bought it new, you really think that Leica didn't know about this for years? Really?

FYI I never wet cleaned it. And it was stored in a dry box between use. And I live in Los Angeles, not some overtly humid climate.
The Leica M-E was introduced in September 2012, the same month and year that the Leica M9 was discontinued (after three years of production) and the Leica M typ 240 was introduced. The first reports of sensor corrosion problems I can find, reported on M9 bodies, date to late Spring 2014.

I'm sure Leica didn't know about the corrosion problem in 2012. There had been other problems with the sensor earlier in the model's history ... cracks and bad communications lines ... which were judged to be "single point defective" issues by all and sundry. They never amounted to more than a 1% of production warranty issue.

Since there are even now cameras that have not displayed the sensor corrosion problem, I surmise that it is a problem that surfaces after some time and under certain conditions of stress. For example, my M9 was purchased new in January 2012 and took three years to exhibit the problem. I never wet cleaned my camera's sensor either, and it was always kept in my usual manner ... mostly in a 68-75 degree, dry condominium in Silicon Valley. Far as I can tell, the camera was never stressed or subjected to unusually humid environment at all. It functioned perfectly the entire time I owned it, omitting the sensor corrosion issue itself which surfaced very rapidly about November of 2014.

Making the assumption that Leica knew that there was a corrosion problem with these sensors back when the M9 and M-E were being designed (approximately 2007 for the start of M9 development, I imagine) is to accuse them and the sensor supplier of extended fraud and conspiracy to defraud. I doubt you'll find any evidence to base that claim on, and I'm certain that it took Leica and the folks at Kodak who designed and produced the sensor for them by surprise as much as it took users by surprise. And it cost them FAR FAR more than the minor inconvenience of having the camera out of action while a new sensor was installed too.

The whole sensor corrosion issue is an unfortunate incident that has been as well handled by Leica as it is possible to imagine. You suggest a better way to handle what probably cost them a loss of several million dollars cash, a year or so worth of development effort and time, and so much user confidence and satisfaction.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #93
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,659
The question is will anyone buy a used M9/MM/ME, whose sensor has not been replaced, after August, 2017, and if so, what will they be willing to pay for it. The market will speak. I suspect the used price will fall by some percentage of the new sensor replacement cost.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #94
DwF
Registered User
 
DwF's Avatar
 
DwF is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
David,

I too am on the pleased side of the coin, but I understand why others might not be pleased.

Cal
Cal, I share this sentiment as well, and if I hadn't found corrosion now would not have been as happy about it. I also agree that Leica seems to be making every effort for their customer base. This is a tricky one because many of us who own these CCD cameras would have little or no desire to "trade-up"

David
__________________
DwF DwF’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #95
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
The question is will anyone buy a used M9/MM/ME, whose sensor has not been replaced, after August, 2017, and if so, what will they be willing to pay for it. The market will speak. I suspect the used price will fall by some percentage of the new sensor replacement cost.
I agree, it's only sensible to assume so. It's what I would negotiate around were I ever in the market for another one of these cameras.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #96
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,659
It would seem Leica expects a significant number of sensor replacements in the future. I do not think they would take the bad PR hit from the replacement policy reversal if sensor replacements had slowed and expectations were that they would trickle off. Also, when you look at the turn around time for sensor replacement, including time on the waiting list, it seems their service department is inundated.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #97
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwolf View Post
...
The M-E was discontinued in 11/2015 and the MM1 was sold until 5/2016. So Leica actually did sell quite a few cameras known to be defective.

I expect for those who bought during that period, the good faith pledge was a big factor in their decision. It certainly was for me.

John
M-in-E is with S/N from 2015, purchased new in 2016. I was well aware of the free sensor exchange at the time of the purchase. But it was the only new digital M which was priced affordable in my case, any way. Now it is free for another four-five years and if camera will still works after five years and the only problem will be the sensor for 1K$ replacement and full re-haul for free... I'm in.

Who knows what M240 and M10 is going to have to be replaced...
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #98
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
The Leica M-E was introduced in September 2012, the same month and year that the Leica M9 was discontinued (after three years of production) and the Leica M typ 240 was introduced. The first reports of sensor corrosion problems I can find, reported on M9 bodies, date to late Spring 2014.

I'm sure Leica didn't know about the corrosion problem in 2012. There had been other problems with the sensor earlier in the model's history ... cracks and bad communications lines ... which were judged to be "single point defective" issues by all and sundry. They never amounted to more than a 1% of production warranty issue.

Since there are even now cameras that have not displayed the sensor corrosion problem, I surmise that it is a problem that surfaces after some time and under certain conditions of stress. For example, my M9 was purchased new in January 2012 and took three years to exhibit the problem. I never wet cleaned my camera's sensor either, and it was always kept in my usual manner ... mostly in a 68-75 degree, dry condominium in Silicon Valley. Far as I can tell, the camera was never stressed or subjected to unusually humid environment at all. It functioned perfectly the entire time I owned it, omitting the sensor corrosion issue itself which surfaced very rapidly about November of 2014.

Making the assumption that Leica knew that there was a corrosion problem with these sensors back when the M9 and M-E were being designed (approximately 2007 for the start of M9 development, I imagine) is to accuse them and the sensor supplier of extended fraud and conspiracy to defraud. I doubt you'll find any evidence to base that claim on, and I'm certain that it took Leica and the folks at Kodak who designed and produced the sensor for them by surprise as much as it took users by surprise. And it cost them FAR FAR more than the minor inconvenience of having the camera out of action while a new sensor was installed too.

The whole sensor corrosion issue is an unfortunate incident that has been as well handled by Leica as it is possible to imagine. You suggest a better way to handle what probably cost them a loss of several million dollars cash, a year or so worth of development effort and time, and so much user confidence and satisfaction.

G
What you are suggesting is that Leica and/or the sensor mfg did not perform any type of product testing before putting it out into the market.
Products normally undergo an intensive battery of tests to see points of failure, and how long to get there. And how to improve the failure rate so that the likelihood of it happening under warranty is minimized..
For my sensor to fail so quickly under the category of corrosion, as well as many others, this suggests that either there was little to no product testing pre market release, or Leica did not think it would be an issue as most Leica owners are not Leica users. The cameras are trinkets.
The gamble that Leica took obviously failed, and the only reason that this initial 'goodwill' offering was introduced was to stave off the possibility of a class action law suit.

To think that Leica has our backs is naive. The offer by them to 'upgrade' the affected users to an M240 was very clever as it keeps them in the fold.
Leica is a business, just like any other. They try to maximize their profits by cost cutting where they can without pushing it too far so it bites them.
In this case it did.

As for only finding out about it in 2014..

A quick google search and I am sure there are numerous other accounts.
Especially since mine failed in 2012, 2 years before Leica was "aware" of this corrosion issue.


https://www.dpreview.com/articles/87...orrosion-issue

First comment from 2014:
"Three sensor changes in the fours years i have owned a M9....
Leica store in Paris blamed it on me because i use my camera in a tropical environment.....and i was warned that I will have to pay for the next sensor change !!!!"

So he had his first corroded sensor in 2010. The camera was released in 2009. But Leica was "unaware" of this until 2014? Right.

Yes he used it in a tropical climate, but so are digital cameras from other mfgs w/o this issue. And if the tropical climate is an issue Leica would have known it from their pre production testing. Such that it was.
From their testing results, they would have thus known about this failure and would have either :
1. made a change to the sensor or
2. informed owners that their cameras should not be used in humid climates (a non starter from a sales stand point)
3. Kept quiet about it figuring they could deal with it on a case by case basis.

Guess which one history shows they chose?

I am enjoying my M240 when I use it. Perhaps Leica has finally kicked these issues when they moved to the generic CMOS sensor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #99
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is online now
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,714
I have to agree, I think they must of known early on and were taking a bit of a gamble, just like they did with the M8 and IR.
Maybe they should have done a recall but they are a small company.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #100
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwF View Post
Cal, I share this sentiment as well, and if I hadn't found corrosion now would not have been as happy about it. I also agree that Leica seems to be making every effort for their customer base. This is a tricky one because many of us who own these CCD cameras would have little or no desire to "trade-up"

David
David,

I would not trade up to a M-246, and I intend on keeping my MM till it dies. I am an old film die hard, I still shoot film, but the Monochrom seems to have been especially designed for me. No frills, simple, and quirky. Other than the sensor corrosion not a problem. I only had two batteries, but a friend gave me his extra M9 battery he had laying around so now I have three.

The vulcanite was worn smooth on right front of my camera because I ended up shooting it a lot. The anodize is worm through along some edges showing silver underneath, and the top plate has a patina of a well loved camera.

The M-246 is a better camera in so many ways, all except one: the M246 seems to have a scooped midrange, while my MM has the mids that resemble medium and large format. For me this is how the MM speaks.

I would love to get a M-246 one day, but the MM has become an important camera to me and out of all digital cameras it is most film like not because of rendering but because it is such a basic camera dispite all the improvements of more modern digital cameras.

As a day trader of camera gear, where I am known to do all kinds of crazy trades; I speculate that the MM will always have a cult following as well as haters, and cameras that have their sensor replacement documentation will enjoy a premium over cameras that do not have sensor replacement or documented sensor replacement.

Also know that there is that 2015 cutoff where the replacement sensors were upgraded to deal with the corrosion problem. For those of us lucky to be in the post 2015 sweet spot with sensor replacement we are in the sweet spot. Now is the time to try and get into that sweet spot.

The only thing that might get me not to want a M-246 in the future BTW is if Leica comes out with a SLM (SL Monochrom) which may or may not happen. My guess if it is going to happen it kinda fits in maybe later this year. Artists can be dillusional I say. LOL. Know that I already own a SL and the gigantic and extra heavy 50 Lux-SL.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #101
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraser View Post
I have to agree, I think they must of known early on and were taking a bit of a gamble, just like they did with the M8 and IR.
Maybe they should have done a recall but they are a small company.
A recall. Say 50.000 (Probably considerably more) cameras @ a 1300 Euro net sensor each. Not counting labour. That kind of loss would finish the company. Never mind the complete lack of manpower to do the job.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #102
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,492
I may go back to using film then.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #103
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlu19 View Post
I just read the free sensor replacement offer is ending in August 2017. Would Leica take a look at my M9P even if I don't see a sensor problem with it?
Good question. I would be interested in having my M9 checked out too.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #104
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
What you are suggesting is that Leica and/or the sensor mfg did not perform any type of product testing before putting it out into the market. ...
Nope. But I'm tired of debating this. I disagree with your conjectures. They don't make engineering sense, and Leica is an excellent engineering oriented company.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #105
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,492
I should send in to Leica my M9 to have the sensor checked out. Hopefully, the cost is zero.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-17-2017   #106
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,659
Details on upgrade option in lieu of sensor replacement:

https://leicarumors.com/2017/05/17/u...orrosion.aspx/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #107
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
Nope. But I'm tired of debating this. I disagree with your conjectures. They don't make engineering sense, and Leica is an excellent engineering oriented company.

G
M8 - purple tones until they realized it needed a proper IR filter
M9 - corroding sensors
M240 - adopted CMOS - no sensor issues AFAIK
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #108
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwolf View Post
Thanks for that. According to my calculation they are giving you $4070 for an MM1 when purchasing an MM2. That's pretty good.

John
John,

If your number is correct there is some "value added" to make a pretty good number.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #109
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,659
One downside to the MM is that it does not record RGB information and you therefore do not have access to the color adjustments for black and white images in the HSL/Color/B&W menu in Lightroom. You need to use filters in front of the lens as with film. I frequently avail myself of those adjustments when processing monochrome images. Of course, the MM does offer other advantages, so there are trade-offs to consider.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #110
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,384
B&W film is just as troublesome...
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #111
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
B&W film is just as troublesome...
With B&W film, you use filters in front of the lens; with digital, you shoot in color, convert to B&W, and use the color adjustments in the HSL/Color/B&W module in Lightroom. With the MM (and scanned B&W film), those adjustments are not operational.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #112
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
With B&W film, you use filters in front of the lens; with digital, you shoot in color, convert to B&W, and use the color adjustments in the HSL/Color/B&W module in Lightroom. With the MM (and scanned B&W film), those adjustments are not operational.
With an MM or M246, you use B&W filters in front of the lens when exposing your photos to adjust the grayscale tonal relationship of different colors. Essentially, the MM and M246 sensors have their basic spectral response just like B&W films do; you modify it with filters to suit your needs.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #113
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 5,946
I don't know whether to hope my M9 sensor lasts forever, or craps out before August.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #114
Chris Bail
Regular Guy
 
Chris Bail's Avatar
 
Chris Bail is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Near Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 461
FYI:

My MM is with Leica USA right now for a new sensor (corrosion). They've had it for 8 weeks, and quoted me 12 week turn around after they processed it.

So, YMMV with regard to turn around time if you send your camera to Leica NJ.

Thankfully, My M9 has not shown any corrosion.
__________________
My Smugmug

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #115
mexipike
Registered User
 
mexipike is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 146
I'm not sure how I feel about all this.

I am in agreement with Calzone in that the CCD monochrom is just "for me". A lot of things annoy me about it but it has about as many features if not more than my other favorite camera, the Mamiya 7ii.

As far as I know my sensor doesn't have any corrosion. I bought my camera used, from a dealer, it's registered with Leica with a purchase date of April 2015, though I'm pretty sure that's when I transferred the registration. So I'm not actually sure the new purchase date. Anyone know how to check by serial?

My main problem is that I'm about to go back to school (for photography) and have three photo projects going on right now. So I can't really see a 12 week gap to work without my camera, especially before August. I find Leica's slow turnaround and lack of loaner policy to be a little frustrating. I tried to contact someone a year ago to find who to send my camera to but after two weeks of email and phone calls I got zero responses. I work for an 8 person small business and even we can do better than that.

If Leica intends to keep on hand sensors and when mine develops the problem I can just send it back and pay $1000, I guess that's alright.

If I didn't love this camera and optics so much I would ditch this brand, cause I really don't feel that they care at all for their customers.

On the other hand, as prices plummet because of Leica's crappy support I can just pickup a few other monochrome ccd bodies and keep shooting with a camera I love.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-18-2017   #116
dreamsandart
Registered User
 
dreamsandart's Avatar
 
dreamsandart is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Japan
Posts: 519
With this new Leica CCD camera policy, I thought it best to just contact Leica Japan and ask what my options are. They wrote back the next day saying it had been 3 years since they had replaced my sensor (with an original style, the new were not available yet) and to just send it in for service and new sensor replacement, no questions asked.

So personally from my experience, all is thankfully well and to be taken care of. I'm the original owner of an M9 bought in 2009 and will have a good as new camera back in my hands in a month.

As for the time constraint of the new policy, I understand and don't understand. It's an issue of the original admittedly defective sensor which I think Leica got right after it all blew up. Seems Leica would like to put this [mostly] all behind them and move on. The new policy isn't perfect, does force the owners into spending for (as their logic goes) a 'CLA and extended warranty' after a cut-off date if a new sensor is needed, and the policy change notice comes too soon to this date I feel. It could be a problem for some owners. To Leica's credit, they are still backing cameras that are up to 8 years old with a complete service option.

The best way to deal with this as it stands now? Send any non-updated original sensor M-CCD you may have in before the free service option expires Aug 2017 and see what they say.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-19-2017   #117
ornate_wrasse
Moderator
 
ornate_wrasse's Avatar
 
ornate_wrasse is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,204
I am concerned as I bought my Leica M9 used, actually from an ad in the classifieds here at RFF from someone who lived in the same city as me. I don't know how old the camera is since I bought it used.

I must admit I have not yet checked to see if there is corrosion on the seńor. Other than a couple trips to the East Coast, I have used it in Oregon, which is dry in the summer but quite rainy the rest of the year.

Due to reading about Leica's new policy, I will check the sensor right away. If I don't see any of those halo bubbles, I'll still likely send it in to Leica and have them look at it. Let's hope I see some evidence of corrosion before sending it to Leica

Does anyone know if there is a Leica servicing center on the West Coast, or at least closer to Oregon than Leica in New Jersey?

I'm sure glad I saw this. Thanks Calzone for posting about it.

Ellen
__________________
Images

www.pbase.com/ornate_wrasse

Leica M9, Leica M6, Leica M3 - 21mm 3.4 Super Angulon, 28mm 2.8 Elmarit, 35mm Summicron, Nikkor SC 50mm 1.4, Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm 1.5, CV 75mm 2.5, Nikkor 8.5cm 2.0

Mamiya 6 - 50mm f4, 75mm f3.5, 150mm f4.5

Fuji X-Pro1 - 16-55mm f/2.8, 27mm f/2.8
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-19-2017   #118
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by ornate_wrasse View Post
I am concerned as I bought my Leica M9 used, actually from an ad in the classifieds here at RFF from someone who lived in the same city as me. I don't know how old the camera is since I bought it used.

I must admit I have not yet checked to see if there is corrosion on the seńor. Other than a couple trips to the East Coast, I have used it in Oregon, which is dry in the summer but quite rainy the rest of the year.

Due to reading about Leica's new policy, I will check the sensor right away. If I don't see any of those halo bubbles, I'll still likely send it in to Leica and have them look at it. Let's hope I see some evidence of corrosion before sending it to Leica

Does anyone know if there is a Leica servicing center on the West Coast, or at least closer to Oregon than Leica in New Jersey?

I'm sure glad I saw this. Thanks Calzone for posting about it.

Ellen
Ellen,

I would call with your serial number and talk with the service manager. This initiated a shipping label to at least cover shipping and insurance. It seems with the serial number they will know the service history.

I think for the USA the only service center is in New Jersey.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-19-2017   #119
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Seeing my sensor in the M-E, which had been in production for years already in the M9, went bad in 4 months after I bought it new, you really think that Leica didn't know about this for years? Really?

FYI I never wet cleaned it. And it was stored in a dry box between use. And I live in Los Angeles, not some overtly humid climate.
The timeline and content of Leica's responses to water-based IR filter delamination is over-shadowed by their solution. So while I think it is fair [1] to assume Leica sold some units knowing there was an issue, in the end customers' needs came first.

1. I used the word "fair" purposefully.

Leica initially blamed inappropriate sensor cleaning methods for IR filter delamination. Anecdotal evidence suggests the initial replacement policy was incoherent. Then first formal announcement regarding sensor-replacement billing spawned an incipient, global, public relations fiasco. That issue quickly ended when the current policy was announced. Now, the policy is modified. I believe the post-August 2017 changes are reasonable. Even if Leica didn't ship cameras knowing they could likely develop sensor corrosion, their decisions before December 2014 invite cynical conclusions. Obviously it is impossible to know anything more. What we do know is the CEO during the CCD sensor crisis was fired. I doubt the CCD sensor issue was the sole cause. But if Leica did ship units knowing they could be defective, one can see how that would contribute to the Board's loss of confidence in Alfred Schopf. In February 2017 the current CEO announced he would leave in August 2017. I don't know if this situation has changed.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-19-2017   #120
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
With an MM or M246, you use B&W filters in front of the lens when exposing your photos to adjust the grayscale tonal relationship of different colors. Essentially, the MM and M246 sensors have their basic spectral response just like B&W films do; you modify it with filters to suit your needs.

G
The ON Semi-conductor KAF-18500's spectral transmission response is 330 to 710 nm. This matches human vision. The most linear region is ~ 400 to 540 nm. Here's the data (scroll to the very end).

Filters that affect transmission response between 400 to 540 nm will significantly modify the raw file digital numbers compared to not using a filter. This means the default model parameters in the demosaicing interpolation algorithms no correlate directly to the data. This could be a good thing... especially for in-camera JPEG users. Lens filters outside this range will have smaller effects because the sensor's spectral response is attenuated.

Whether or not identical or even nearly identical image aesthetics can achieved by post-production raw file rendering parameters in the absence of traditional B&W lens filters is another matter. However not using lens filters means having the all the data at one's disposal as opposed to irreversibly limiting the raw file information content when the shutter is open.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:45.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.