[Leica] Re: M8-not ready for Prime Time (a long and sorrowfullament)

[walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson)]

Your dogs does that too? Must be a German Shepard.

Jeffery Smith wrote:
> When it fails intermittently, it's like a dog that acts sick at home but
> behaves wonderfully at the vet. When it fails intermittently, my first
> impression is that it is a software glitch. I do wonder just how much time
> this camera was beta-tested before send it out to market.
>
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> http://www.400tx.com
> http://400tx.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of 
> Lawrence
> Zeitlin
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 2:33 PM
> To: lug@leica-users.org
> Subject: [Leica] Re: M8-not ready for Prime Time (a long and
> sorrowfullament)
>
>
> I don't know what percentage of the LUG owns M8 cameras but a number  
> of Luggers have complained about glitches, inadequacies, and outright  
> failures. While it is true that the squeeky wheel gets the most  
> grease, I too would be more than a little pissed if my long awaited  
> Leica camera was defective. Arbitrarily assuming that 10% of the LUG  
> has purchased the M8 and that only a dozen buyers are unsatisfied,  
> that's a failure rate of about 6%. Far too great for a $5000 prestige  
> camera.
>
> But why so many complaints about a new digital camera when older  
> Leicas are cherished for their reliability. It's the difference  
> between mechanical and electronic product failure characteristics.
>
> If correctly designed and manufactured, mechanical devices fail  
> primarily as a function of wear, usually expressed as the number of  
> duty cycles. Back when the M Leicas were introduced, Leica was proud  
> of the fact that the cameras were designed for 250,000 exposures  
> while competing cameras were only expected to last 150,000 to 200,000  
> exposures. But parts rub against each other, springs weaken,  
> lubrication wears out and use takes its toll. As these processes take  
> place, performance gradually deteriorates to the point where the user  
> notices it. End of life is reached when parts can no longer be  
> adjusted to bring the camera up to specifications. But, except in a  
> few rare instances (i.e. the camera being dropped on a concrete floor  
> or submerged in salt water), the cameras fail gracefully and present  
> few surprises to the user.
>
> Solid state electronic devices, after the initial burn in period,  
> have a long and indeterminate life span. I say indeterminate because  
> individual components tend fail randomly as a function of conditions  
> of operation. The closer to the rated voltage and current limits, the  
> shorter the MTBF. If the unit is designed conservatively and  
> components are operated well within specifications, the electronics  
> can last a long, long time, independent of the number of duty cycles.  
> But when the electronic device fails, it usually does so abruptly.  
> One day it works, the next it stops working. There is no graceful  
> failure here - more like catastrophic.
>
> The M8 is positioned between both groups. It has mechanical parts,  
> switches, moving optical elements, focus cams, and shutter. It also  
> has electronics, microprocessor, CCD, LEDs and batteries (which have  
> a limited life based on the number of recharge cycles). The  
> mechanicals may fail gracefully, the electronics catastrophically.  
> Most of the complaints on the LUG are about electronic glitches since  
> the mechanical elements have not had much of a chance to wear out.
>
> When I worried about hi tech reliability in aerospace equipment for a  
> living, we had a test and quality control department almost as big as  
> the engineering department. In fact the engineering department  
> usually objected to strenuous test and evaluation procedures on the  
> grounds that no rational person would abuse their precious equipment  
> or operate it outside of its design limits. But it's hard to repair a  
> failure on an unmanned space vehicle a million miles from earth. The  
> equipment was tested in every possible environment and subjected to  
> both physical and electrical abuse. If something broke it was  
> redesigned and fixed.
>
> It is apparent that Leica skimped on testing and evaluation before  
> pushing the M8 out the door. It is a camera clearly designed by  
> technicians for technicians. I don't need to run through the litany  
> of problems all of which will be corrected "any time now." They  
> should have been detected and corrected before the cameras were  
> shipped. Apparently Leica marketing hoped that buyers would pay a  
> high entry fee to act as "beta" test evaluators. The only way they  
> could get away with that strategy is to repair and replace  
> malfunctioning equipment immediately, studying the failed equipment  
> to determine its weak spots. Instead broken M8s apparently while away  
> months in Solms and New Jersey.
>
> In April my dealer lent me an M8 for a week. I didn't experience any  
> catastrophic failures but the camera did lock up once and required a  
> battery removal for a reset. If you looked closely there was slight  
> evidence of banding and magenta shift and the white balance was a but  
> off. Battery life was much shorter than I am used to on digital  
> cameras. I could live with all this if the pictures were indeed  
> exceptional but they didn't appear to be significantly better than  
> any other high end digital camera (heresy). For me, the joy of using  
> my Leica lenses on a digital RF camera was not worth the purchase  
> price. I returned the camera and reluctantly cancelled my order. I'll  
> wait until the M8.1 or perhaps the M9, hoping that Leica gets it right.
>
> Finally I disagree with the philosophy that you show support for a  
> company by buying an inadequate product. In business, as in life, you  
> get what you reward. Hold Leica's feet to the fire and make them  
> deliver the hoped for "perfect" digital M. In the meantime I continue  
> to use my highly reliable, predictable, superb quality M3 cameras  
> with real film. The lenses fit the older cameras just fine.
>
> Larry Z
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>