Re: [Leica] Re: Leica quality

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

A lot of what you just said becomes true only when you place the product on
a pedestal, view the company as "God-like", and otherwise inspect every
tiny detail of everything Leitz/Leica made/makes with a microscope. Do
people do this with the Contax G camera, Canon E's, or the Nikon F's. No.
They buy them and use them. I buy Leicas and use them. They are tools, not
jewelry. And if you do inspect other cameras and camera companies with the
SAME microscope, you will find at least as many anomalies, if not more.

It's all in how you perceive what you are looking at. People who "hand
make" anything, are still only human. Their "quality" will flow and ebb
with their life. Death in the family, fight with spouse, serious illness,
all can lead to "human" error. To take a hand made product one step farther
and run a rigorous QC on every single item, would put the company out of
business. No one would be able to afford the product. And, in reality, I
wonder what percentage of the product actually has serious problems? Things
like putting it on B (or not winding after the last shot), the loading
door, etc, are things that you very quickly learn to use and then never
give it a second thought. Without the removable bottom plate, we wouldn't
have the Abrahamsson winder.

I just made an insurance list, serial numbers, part number, all that stuff,
and listed the replacement cost of most at what mint used is. A few items
are new. The total came to (the price of a new BMW) worth of Leica
equipment. Out of ALL of that equipment, I have sent only ONE lens back to
Leica for adjustment. Nothing else has even hiccupped. That lens, the
70-180 APO zoom had a stiff zoom feel. That was it!

I'm perfectly happy with Leica quality and QC. If I do get a bad item, I
know it will be rectified post haste.

Jim


At 11:44 AM 9/1/98 +0000, you wrote:
>Marga (Souris) wrote: QC has deteriorated universally due to our
>"plastic" throw away technology
>
>I remember my late father being shocked by the appearance of plastic
>on the M4 and Leicaflex. For his generation, plastic = junk, and the
>appearance of plastic on the M4 was to him a sign that Leica quality
>had started to deteriorate.  It's easy to smile at such a simplistic
>view, but I wonder how many sales were lost to folk of his age back in
>the 1960s and early 1970s.
>
>What's even sadder than the deterioration of QC is the deterioration
>in design quality. The M6 has been in production since 1984, and we
>still have to turn the shutter to B to avoid running down the
>batteries. Spectacle wearers still can't see the 28mm frame. The
>camera still doesn't have an R-style opening back. And on how many
>cameras is the plastic tip of the lever wind scuffing the top panel?
>
>Regards,
>
>Doug Richardson
>