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

[jsmith342 at cox.net (Jeffery Smith)]

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