Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/05/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]An Akita wouldn't do that. 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 Walt Johnson Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 3:27 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: M8-not ready for Prime Time (a longand sorrowfullament) 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 > > _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information