[Leica] Re: flawless Leica

[Jim Brick <jimbrick@photoaccess.com>]

At 09:35 AM 4/24/00 -0400, Jim Shulman wrote:
>Common sense also dictates that equipment at this price level SHOULD be free
>from defects, or close to virtually unmeasurable defect levels.  When you
>purchase a $2000 or $3000 lens, or a $2000+ camera body, you're buying both
>craftsmanship as well as technology.  It's not unreasonable to demand both
>for your money.  These are Leicas, not Dianas.
>

Everybody seems to forget that these are electro-mechanical devices,
designed and manufactured by human beings. Humans have the ugly trait of:
not feeling well 100% of the time; having family problems (death, divorce,
children involved in the wrong areas, etc.); being distracted, while
working, by external stimuli; governed by "needing" the paycheck so going
to work while any of the above is going on. But not conducive to producing
"flawless" pieces of equipment.

People think the Rolls Royce automobile should be perfect. Far from it!
They have many many failures and even recalls.

The checks and balances in a good manufacturing company will catch many,
maybe most, flaws. But certainly their is room for error. And errors do get
through. It is absolutely impossible for anything, man made, to be always
perfect.

Remember the few hundred new M6's that were scratching film? Because the
person who QC'ed the film pressure plates was not there (perhaps one of the
conditions listed above) and someone, obviously unskilled in film pressure
plates, was filling in. When the QC person has a problem... lots of stuff
gets through. Aaah, his manager should have made sure the proper person was
filling in. Perhaps the manager was also away. Off site meeting. Sick. A
dozen other reasons. Who knows. Please pardon my language, but "shit happens."

Also remember that not all parts are manufactured at Leica by Leica. They
are relying upon someone else to supply parts to Leica's specs. Leica does
not even make their own production glass. Schott and Hoya are the main
Leica glass suppliers. Even QC cannot always detect poor methods or
materials from a supplier. Many times, detection is when the equipment
fails in the field.

For decades, Rolls Royce transmissions were the General Motors Hydromatic,
directly from the GM US transmission plant. Did GM have a special RR
assembly line? No. Did they use special RR parts? No. Were they good
transmissions? Yes. Did they ever fail? Of course. But this is a Rolls
Royce. It is supposed to be perfect. BS!

Remember Apollo 13? Remember the Space Shuttle Challenger? We are talking
human lives here. Not just if a camera will take a picture. All of the
money and QC in the world will not produce flawless products. Period!

So don't place you Leica on a pedestal. It will have as many failures as
any other human designed and manufactured device. Just know that it is the
best at resolving fine images on to 35mm film. If it breaks, get it fixed.

Above all, carry it with you and take lots of pictures.

Jim

PS... As a point of reference, my Hasselblad 203FE body (only the body, no
lens, no film back) was over $5000. $8000 with a normal lens and a film
back. Do I expect it to be flawlessly perfect just because it is so
expensive? No. To do so would be really dumb. I do hope it is a Tuesday
through Thursday camera, but only time will tell.

None of my R cameras have ever failed. Starting in 1976 through now, two
R3's, two R4sP's, one R6, three R7's. But I have had to adjust the vertical
RF alignment in both of my M6's. It's just the nature of the beasts. I
accept it.

And due to its simplicity, I would expect a Diana or Holga to have fewer
problems than a very complex Leica.

Jim again