[Leica] Lens defects not isolated to just me

[MyersPete@aol.com]

Bill Wrote:
"Leica stood behind the lens, and did what was
expected.  Your lens was replaced.  It is unfortunate that the lens coating
was twice not to your expectations; but now to look for a USA "dumping"
conspiracy is not warranted.  It is time to use your new lens and to recount
to LUG on the images you and it captured, and not to continue to dwell on
disheartening past moments.  Good shooting.
Bill Caldwell"

Bill:
I raised the question of quality control problems in the USA market.I'm not
sure why the word "conspiracy" entered your comments. I certainly does not
take a conspiracey to ship defective products to a specific market. Are you
connected with Leica? Or why the flame?

I have received over a half dozen private emails from LUG people indicating
that they too have received defective lens coatings this past year - on
multiple lenses of the same model. You can check with the Contax group or the
Canon group or the Nikon group to see if this frequency occurs with them, but
I doubt you'll find that it is.

I would be happy to report on the beautiful images that my new lens makes to
the group - if and when I receive a lens from Leica that is defect free.
Certainly my first lens, the R28mm, was perfect. I reported that long before
the defects came up. The image quality has been outstanding. Check the
archives.

I paid for my new lens two months ago. It took three weeks to get delivery
from Leica on the first lens. The replacment took even longer. Solms does not
have any in stock at this time. The prospects of waiting a quarter of a year+
to get a lens is not a happy one for me. This is a common focal length and a
work horse of the R system.

I appologize if my comments about Leica and the USA market have been upsetting
to you or any one else on the list. However, my lens defect with multiple
copies of the same lens is not isolated to just me. Ted suggested that it was
a one in a million odds that it occured with me. If a half a dozen people on
LUG have had the same problem, out of 400-500 subscribers, it is actually a
fairly common event and I think worth finding out the reason.

Also, I have made specific praise on previous posts towards the efforts made
my the technicans and customer service at Leica USA towards getting my lens
replaced. I'm sure they made best efforts. The spot on the rear element of the
second lens was fairly small and had to be seen when lit properly - it was not
casually obvious. However, it exisists.

If Solms had R35 f2 ROMs in stock and could provide them to New Jersey, the
turn around time for the double replacment of my lens would have been in total
two to three weeks. But, they can not replace what they do not have in stock.
Others on the list with multiple defects have been lucky in that the dealer or
Leica had more units in stock - therefore a small turn time.

In my previous life, I wrote QA procedures for NASA in testing equipment that
flew on the Shuttle. QA has a pretty basic structure to it. When things end up
in boxes that are not right, there is a human reason why they got in the
boxes. I certainly did not put the lens with the bad coating in the box for
Leica. It is a premium priced product and a lot of the price is paid for QA. 

At a point when I do get my R35mm f2 ROM, I am sure I will enjoy shooting it.
Until that point, I remain frustrated in the difficulties of returning a
product multiple times and the delays involved. Other people on the list seem
to be having the same problems and the same frustrations. I'm sorry if you
dont want to hear about it. I think its important and I think others on the
list have expressed the same. Some of my frustration has been expressed in
humor, which always seems to be a risk in the electronic domain as being
misinturpeted.

Pete Myers