Losing faith

[Symeon]

It's quite depressing, really, reading about all these defects and problems the digital Leica Ms have. I bought my M8 in the spring of 2007 and dropped it on a thick carpet from a height of about 80cm. The shutter blocked and I had to send it to Sohms for repair and although I had it for less than 3 months the guarantee did not cover this "accident" (Sohms said politely as they charged me Euro 350 for the job). Since then the camera has been working fine (with minor glitches, typical overexposure of ½ EV) but I keep away from C mode as the buffer is ridiculous. I can excuse ISO noise, I can overlook shutter sound and the absence of a good camera hold after they got rid of the film advance lever, but faulty body mechanics are inexcusable.
Ultimately Leica is not what it was. I still use (occasionally) my M3 made in 1961 and the old horse behaves as if it were made only last year. Those were the days. The price tags for the M8-M9 bodies is definitely absurd, especially when these are very unreliable cameras. Leica lenses continue being the very best in the world of photography, but bodies have definitely degenerated. It would be a great idea if Panasonic (or somebody) takes over the body department for M cameras and leaves Leica to deal with the optics. The company has lost our trust and has managed to make many of us old Leicaists very angry. Personally I am enraged, despite the fact that my M8 still works I know that it won't in the near future. For the time being I just sit and wait for a decent M-mount body to appear (preferably not Leica!) where I can fit my large collection of lenses. Until then I keep my fingers crossed.

Cheers.

 

[Damaso]

Whenever you buy a first generation product you have to expect it will not be perfect. Yes the digital Ms are overpriced and no they do not work as well and will not last as long as film based M cameras. Leica should have spent another year working on the M8 or more specifically should have started research on it much earlier instead of denying that they would have to go digital as they did for many years.

The M8 is far from a perfect camera (the M9 seems better but is even more expensive). I knew that going in. It still is better for me than a digital SLR so I put up with its imperfections. Could Leica have done a better job, of course. Part of their calculus, especially when it comes to price, is that there aren't really any other options out there...

 

[thegman]

I'm not an M8 or M9 owner, and have no intention of being one, but I do accept that when we buy niche products, they don't have the money and QA thrown at them that mass market products do. A mass market company dreads having to recall products, and I think their QA reflects that. Also, A $7000 Nikon or Canon is made for professional use, a Leica is made for a hobbyist/collector, and is built accordingly.

I think this really became a problem with digital, as complex electronics are just begging to go wrong anyway, so the problem is magnified.

But that is the price we pay for these beautiful cameras, for my Rollei 35, I had to hunt around for the right battery, struggle with the meter etc. but I'd have that any day instead of a soulless digital compact.

I don't defend Leica, they charge a lot of money, and maybe the reliability does not quite match up to that, but I'll take that instead of another hunk of black plastic, covered in buttons.

But for the OP, if the M3 pleases you, but the M8 does not, easy fix for that; sell the M8, buy some film. If you need digital, just get a £299 DSLR.

 

[Fraser]

Its four years old and still works, the only problem you've had is after you dropped it. The M8 is far from perfect but I enjoy a change from using DSLRs every day of the week.

 

[wilt]

Whenever you buy a first generation product you have to expect it will not be perfect.

I couldn't resist noticing the irony of the M3 being given, by the original poster, as an example of a more reliable camera, 50 years down the line, given that the M3 was a first generation product ...

 

[Frontman]

I love Leica, but I can't justify the expense vs performance of digital Leicas. If I were to apply Leica's performance to price ratio to a camera like the Nikon D700, then the D700 would cost $18,000 or so.

But, fortunately for me, I am a film lover, and I have no doubts or concerns about the performance or durability of Leica film cameras.

 

[Gary E]

Of all the brands of cameras I've owned at one time or another, Leica is the only one that I had to get a rangefinder alignment or a CLA, and that's with over 10 years of use with any one brand.

And where's that digital R10? grrr, don't get me started... :bang:

 

[Renzsu]

I love Leica, but I can't justify the expense vs performance of digital Leicas. If I were to apply Leica's performance to price ratio to a camera like the Nikon D700, then the D700 would cost $18,000 or so.

Sure, if Nikon had to make cameras for the same small group of consumers who want a rangefinder, if they were hand assembled in a western country, sure, you'd expect to pay such a price for a D700 (Leica S2 anyone?).
The simple fact of the matter is, that Nikon doesn't make digital rangefinders, so your point is a moot one. They serve a much bigger market, which completely changes the game.

 

[Damaso]

I couldn't resist noticing the irony of the M3 being given, by the original poster, as an example of a more reliable camera, 50 years down the line, given that the M3 was a first generation product ...

Well not really the M3 is an evolution of all that came before it no? And perhaps I should have been more specific and said first generation electronics...

 

[JSU]

Your M8 still works. What evidence do you have that it won't in the near future? You damage it and Leica repairs it to properly to full function. Sounds reasonable to me.

I'm not a Leica fanboy, my complaints have been aired here in the past (M8.2 buffer size and battery quality.) But I'm grateful someone is interested in currently manufacturing a quality DRF camera, who else besides Leica Camera, AG offers such? It is a niche market, the RF has been losing ground (and market share) to SLR's since the introduction of the Nikon F. I'm happy enough with my M8.2's, compared to the alternative.

.... I bought my M8 in the spring of 2007 and dropped it on a thick carpet from a height of about 80cm. The shutter blocked and I had to send it to Sohms for repair and although I had it for less than 3 months the guarantee did not cover this "accident" (Sohms said politely as they charged me Euro 350 for the job). Since then the camera has been working fine (with minor glitches, typical overexposure of ½ EV) ....
.... Personally I am enraged, despite the fact that my M8 still works I know that it won't in the near future. ....

Cheers.

 

[Pablito]

Well not really the M3 is an evolution of all that came before it no? And perhaps I should have been more specific and said first generation electronics...

The M8 is not the first digital Leica, though it's the first one to use M lenses...

 

[certifiable]

I'm not an M8 user, just analogue Leica's... (and I don't think you can compare a 'simple' analogue camera to a digital in terms of durability and strength)

But are you seriously blaming Leica for not giving you waranty after YOU dropped your camera?? that's the same as blaming Opel for not giving you a new car after you drove it into the ocean.

 

[ruby.monkey]

Wondered the same things. I can't see what the problem is and for sure I am not a Leica Fanboy.

Bob

Perhaps he mistook the red dot for a basketball?

 

[thegman]

I'm not an M8 user, just analogue Leica's... (and I don't think you can compare a 'simple' analogue camera to a digital in terms of durability and strength)

But are you seriously blaming Leica for not giving you waranty after YOU dropped your camera?? that's the same as blaming Opel for not giving you a new car after you drove it into the ocean.

Maybe the OP feels that a professional Nikon or the like would survive an 80cm drop onto carpet. I'd say it likely would, but I'd still agree that Leica is reasonable to charge for the repair. But then, had it been dropped 30cm, or 50cm, should it reasonably survive that?

 

[Timmyjoe]

As an owner of a iiif, M6TTL and M8.2 I gotta say I stick with Leica for two reasons.

First the glass, and second their form factor just works for me. The way the iiif, M6TTL w/modified grip, and M8.2 w/Leica grip, fit my hands and interact with me when I am shooting, can't compare to any of the Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex or Minolta cameras I've owned over the last forty years.

But the main thing is certainly the glass. In side by side comparisons to Nikon and Canon glass, the Leica glass always comes out on top in my experience. Sure the Hassy/Zeiss glass and the Rollei/Schneider glass can give it a run, but they're not available in 35mm. So even if the Leica bodies didn't work so well for me, I would keep coming back for the glass.

That doesn't mean I'm a fanboy. I'm currently very frustrated that a number of jobs I'm working on are requiring me to use the Nikon DSLR because I can't get the same flash results from the Leica M8.2. I would love Leica to figure out how to do flash with the digital M cameras.

But otherwise, I'm pretty satisfied. End of ramble.

Best,
-Tim

 

[certifiable]

Maybe the OP feels that a professional Nikon or the like would survive an 80cm drop onto carpet. I'd say it likely would, but I'd still agree that Leica is reasonable to charge for the repair. But then, had it been dropped 30cm, or 50cm, should it reasonably survive that?

Coming from an IT background: doing anything to or using anything the way it shouldn't be used... should result in expiring warenty.
Dropping anything that shouldn't be dropped, should not give you waranty.

 

[peter_n]

I'm also sorry you've had an unhappy ownership experience. I've managed to avoid it by steering completely clear of the M8 and M9. I have a lot of Leica lenses that I'd love to use on a digital body but I'm not paying all that money for unreliability. There was a survey done here at RFF in the last couple of years on M9 failure rates and as I recall it was somewhere between 20-25%. That's just completely unacceptable.

I too am waiting for someone to produce a reliable M-mount but I'm not holding my breath. I'm an amateur, I use B&W film and very much enjoy my two MP bodies and Leica lenses. I satisfied my family's requests for instant results a couple years ago by buying a Fuji S5 dSLR for $550 after it was discontinued. I have a $200 Nikkor 35/1.8 DX lens and for what I use this camera for the results are amazing and the camera is built like a brick (Nikon D200 body with a Fuji sensor). I'd really like to be able to use my Leica glass but until someone produces a dependable product I'll stay with the S5. Yes it's a bit bulkier than the MP but the difference isn't that great and it does work - every time.

 

[MCTuomey]

I'm sorry for your unlucky accident - dropping and having to repair expensive gear is never fun. It's a shame you feel the way you do under the circumstances because the M8 with a decent lens, good technique, and only basic file processing yields excellent prints. I find it a pleasure to shoot as well, compared to my couple dSLRs.

 

[shadowfox]

Hmm... where is that member to whom M8 cannot do no wrong, and *all* ailments are caused by you, the user.

 

[B.S.]

See, this is exactly why they offer the titanium version, to protect from falls onto carpet from up to about 80 centimeters. Not above.