Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Chuck Warman wrote: > > >> Note that there were two posts in the last two days about problems with the > >>80 mm Summilux. How can any company permit such an expensive lens to leave > >>the factory with a potential problem? > > > >And you assume that means most come out defective, or even several? It > >could be coincidence that out of 400 or whatever LUGNUTS two had a problem? > >In the past week or two means nothing. One brought up the other. How about > >all the people who like the lens and had no problem? They aren't going to > >complain. > > > >I'm not saying there couldn't be a problem, but to make such a wildly > >generalist accusation on the basis of two, it just isn't realistic. > > I'm not *about* to take sides on this one, but a couple of questions are in > order: > > 1. Of the 400 LUGnuts, how many have an 80 Summilux? Not many, I'd wager. > > 2. What is an acceptable rate of factory defects on a $2,000 80mm lens? > > Chuck > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Chuck Warman > cwarman@wf.net (Wichita Falls, TX) 2. What is an acceptable rate of factory defects on a $2,000 80mm lens? It should be Zero. I've noticed that the Leica quality control have been diminished and I've reported two incidents in a row on two different lenses, a new 75mm. 1.4 that was unable to focus properly and a new 21 Asph. with severe problems. I can't imagine how a lens can leave the factory with such a defects. We are looking for perfection and can tolerate excellence so such incidents are not tolerable and has to be denounce otherwise we are participants in the decay of excellence. You have to be open to critics and don't be blind to the real facts that a lens of such prestige and price the return rate due to defects should be near zero. But also you have to remember that Leica went public on the stock market and that means that they have to produce money and dividends for the inversionist and not for the consumers. We are a captive consumers and more vulnerable to their needs, so they'll do with us what they want. Be aware and don't suspend your critical judgement. Alberto