nobbylon
Mentor
Whilst agreeing with Roger on this purely out of common sense for anyone's personal finances, this does not sum up what this is about.
It seems to me that customers expectations of service life and resale value have clearly been damaged by this latest issue on parts availability. If they have not then why are prices for s/h M8's and M8.2's clearly dropping. It's not just because of the impending new release. It's the realisation that should the camera need this part then it has been reduced to limited functionality and unfixable. If an M8 or M8.2 is bought now it should be bought with this fact in mind and should fate render it unfixable be priced accordingly and used as a disposable camera.
As long as buyers are aware of this then it's a personal decision as to whether to buy or not.
I realise that some, not all, owners of these cameras may be offended by this reality. Some will choose to ignore out of brand loyalty, others will never buy again. Some will say I'm bashing, maybe a little but although I'm not in the market for a digi R/F any longer I would never buy one from Leica again even if I was because of this latest parts issue. I expect better value for money.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Do you know the story of the Range Rover Classic? They brought out a radically new body style, in the mid-to-late 1990s I think, and kept the old one in production because of all the hysteria in the magazines. I forget how long the old one remained in production, but it wasn't long. Those who could afford new Range Rovers weren't interested...
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Highlight: of course. But 'disposable' is something of an exaggeration.
My understanding, too, is that the 'coffee stain' does not actually render the camera unusable. Has anyone further information on this?
Cheers,
R.
bobbyrab
Well-known
A number of posts here defending Leica and the M8 refer to the probability of LCD failure being relatively low based on their experience of other products with Lcd's.
Is it not the case that the reason Leica has run out of these parts is due to either a manufacturing problem or design flaw that has resulted in a much higher failiure rate than normal. This is at the heart of the issue, your M8 statistically has a much higher likelihood of failing otherwise they wouldn't have run out of them after such a short time. Fact.
Is it not the case that the reason Leica has run out of these parts is due to either a manufacturing problem or design flaw that has resulted in a much higher failiure rate than normal. This is at the heart of the issue, your M8 statistically has a much higher likelihood of failing otherwise they wouldn't have run out of them after such a short time. Fact.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
And, from all the evidence so far, even if it's (say) 100x the failure rate of other LCDs, it's still a pretty tiny risk. Fact.
Cheers,
R.
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
Very good analogy!
bobbyrab
Well-known
What makes it a tiny risk? It's depleted Leica's spares bin in three years, and I'm assuming given their stated aim of ten years support that's three times quicker than they expected, but I've no idea what the failure rate is as a percentage, and I suspect neither do you.
In all likelihood I will at some point still buy an M9, but when I do, the risks will be factored in to my decision of what I'm prepared to pay. This issue with the M8 is unfortunate and happens to relatively small companies who make complex multi sourced products, so many of these components are very product specific and if they're not manufacturing themselves they're at the mercy of the supplier and the suppliers business ethos. So I do have sympathy for Leica, but it has to be something you consider before paying premium prices for their products.
With all the car comparisons we've had, has any car, of the hundreds of different models available and manufactured in the last ten years, had a major component become unavailable thus rendering the car as scrap. I've certainly never heard of any.
Lss
Well-known
Wasn't it just the coffee stain issue (which understandably people wanted fixed) that depleted the stock, not actual failures?
Roger Hicks
Mentor
You are quite right. I don't. But I'm not the one who's crying that the sky is falling. Look at what I said. Assume the failure rate is 100x the failure rate of other LCD screens. It's still going to be tiny. At 1000x, maybe it's significant. I'd be surprised if it were even 100x, but as no-one knows (except presumably Leica), from previous experience of the internet, I reckon it's likely just to be internet hysteria.
As for "In all likelihood I will at some point still buy an M9, but when I do, the risks will be factored in to my decision of what I'm prepared to pay", well, really, who cares? Unless you're buying new, what you are willing to pay is of very little interest to Leica.
Cheers,
R.
bobbyrab
Well-known
Very true, although the second hand market does have a bearing on the buying patterns of original owners in any market, Leica's included.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Probably right, but I doubt it's enormously important in this particular case. There are, after all, three reasons to buy a new Leica. One is because you're a really keen photographer; one is because that's what your family and friends have always used; and the third is as a status symbol.Only the first group is likely to be affected by considerations of second-hand value, and then, not many: if they're that worried about money, they'll buy second-hand anyway. As I have mostly done, until the last decade or so.
Cheers,
R.
zvos1
Well-known
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
You are making a lot of inferences there; they might also simply have had a supply chain issue (i.e. relying on availability by some supplier who then changed their mind), so that they didn't stock enough. It happens to manufacturers a lot and it happened to Leica before. Or any number of other reasons.
If there was a design flaw that led to your statistically significant mass failure of LCDs, I'd have expected it to manifest itself somehow by now. However, this is not what we observe. Instead, there are a selected few people with the coffee stain issue, and disproportionally many people with problem-free M8s, or in fact mostly with no M8s at all, who make lots of noise. Fact.
Eric T
Well-known
The mirrorless competition for Leica is getting VERY good. Note the Sony RX1 and Fuji X-Pro1. Leica prices cannot be justified by image quality or ergonomics or anything else practical. THe RX1 is probably a prelude to an interchangeable lens system as the X100 was for Fuji.
Even if parts remained available for the M8 far into the future, the cost of fixing them will likely exceed their value soon.
So I worry much less about Leica now that excellent mirrorless alternatives are here or on their way soon. I am aware that these alternatives are not rangefinders but EVFs have been getting better and better since the introduction of the Panasonic G1.
Even if parts remained available for the M8 far into the future, the cost of fixing them will likely exceed their value soon.
So I worry much less about Leica now that excellent mirrorless alternatives are here or on their way soon. I am aware that these alternatives are not rangefinders but EVFs have been getting better and better since the introduction of the Panasonic G1.
zvos1
Well-known
I don't know if I am in minority here but I don't really care about M8 screen issues. If mine fails I'll just use it without it. I am having too much fun at the moment shooting this thing to worry about "what if" scenarios.
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
Competition is always a good thing. Even though Leica still has no competitor as a FF mirrorless and will probably never have a competitor as a digital rangefinder. I hope Leica will make more universal products in the future, such as a FF mirrorless with EVF but no RF, something like a FF X2 but with interchangeable lenses. They can't keep on making rangefinders for ever. These things are difficult to maintain and keep accurate, expensive to manufacture, and will become obsolete soon with the advances in LV and focus peaking technology.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
"Cannot be justified" to whom? Mostly, I suggest, to those who do not particularly care for rangefinders, or to those who cannot afford them or do not care to afford them.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Not necessarily. Suppose that decent land-line telephones for people with hearing difficulties typically cost $200. Someone makes one that is markedly inferior, but costs only $100. The $100 junk re-sets the bar. Falsely, but effectively.
Not hard to translate to cameras, motorcycles or anything else...
Note: my father is even harder of hearing than I.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
umcelinho
Marcelo
wondering here what would be a better deal: to get a new M9 for 6k or an used one for 4k or less, considering shutter lifespan and warranty coverage... has anyone out there put some though on this already?