More fun with the Leica M8

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...

: Too bad, the M6 and prior Leica's were favoured by combat correspondents
: and photogs for their reliability, simplicity, compactness not to
: mention image quality.

Indeed.

All Leica were trying to do was try and maintain the qualities
for which they've always been renowed, in the face of the totally
different demands being made on the familiar body shape by digital
reproduction.

It's not particularly edyifying to watch people jumpimg up and down
in glee over their failure, in what's turned out to be a difficult if not
impossible task.

Yes it cost far too much, yes it turned out to be a pile of crap,
yes Leica were the Nazis camera of choice, but it was a noble enterprise
neverthless IMO.



michael adams

....





--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

ransley wrote:
snip
For a camera maker that has been proven for over 80 years to make the
best equipment to put out a crap product with several stupid defects,
the weak body and lack of proper filter makes one wonder what kind of
drunk cheap idiot tested and approved their design. The mistakes were
so obvious. Nobody is jumping for glee but rather are happy they didnt
mortgage their house for what should have been a great camera, to last
their lifetime. Everybody wants one, few can afford one. What is so
difficult about making and testing a piece of equipment when that is
your business, there are millions of tough little good cameras made
every year by many companies. Leica should go out of business for
rebadging Panasonics at double the price, the failure of the M8 and
Leicas lack of customer support of the issues. At the outragous prices
people shelled out these issues should have been fixed free. I am
happy I will now never want or consider a Leica body.

It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have bought
Leitz.
Allen

"Allen" wrote in message
...
ransley wrote:
snip
For a camera maker that has been proven for over 80 years to make the
best equipment to put out a crap product with several stupid defects,
the weak body and lack of proper filter makes one wonder what kind of
drunk cheap idiot tested and approved their design. The mistakes were
so obvious. Nobody is jumping for glee but rather are happy they didnt
mortgage their house for what should have been a great camera, to last
their lifetime. Everybody wants one, few can afford one. What is so
difficult about making and testing a piece of equipment when that is
your business, there are millions of tough little good cameras made
every year by many companies. Leica should go out of business for
rebadging Panasonics at double the price, the failure of the M8 and
Leicas lack of customer support of the issues. At the outragous prices
people shelled out these issues should have been fixed free. I am
happy I will now never want or consider a Leica body.

It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have bought
Leitz.
Allen

And here's the worst part: I have Vista 64 loaded on three machines, none of
them have ever failed. All run perfectly.

Bõwser wrote:
"Allen" wrote in message
[]
It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have
bought Leitz.
Allen

And here's the worst part: I have Vista 64 loaded on three machines,
none of them have ever failed. All run perfectly.

Strange that - I had just the same experience with Vista 32 here. Must be
something in the mains!

David

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:54:15 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

Bõwser wrote:
"Allen" wrote in message
[]
It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have
bought Leitz.
Allen

And here's the worst part: I have Vista 64 loaded on three machines,
none of them have ever failed. All run perfectly.

Strange that - I had just the same experience with Vista 32 here. Must be
something in the mains!

The most common complaint I hear/see about Vista is not about the
stability of the OS, but about compatibility of older programs with
this OS. Many of us have older ("older" in the computer sense of
being purchased one year or more ago) programs that we don't want to
upgrade to fit a new OS.

If I was concerned only with the stability/functional aspects of an
OS, I'd have no problem buying a new computer with Vista. It's the
integration with my extant programs that concern me.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper wrote:
[]
The most common complaint I hear/see about Vista is not about the
stability of the OS, but about compatibility of older programs with
this OS. Many of us have older ("older" in the computer sense of
being purchased one year or more ago) programs that we don't want to
upgrade to fit a new OS.

If I was concerned only with the stability/functional aspects of an
OS, I'd have no problem buying a new computer with Vista. It's the
integration with my extant programs that concern me.

I can appreciate that, Tony, but so far I haven't found any modern
software (say from year 2000 onwards, intended for Windows 2000 or XP)
which won't run. I understand that 16-bit software won't work (but
perhaps it might under a virtual machine), but the only 16-bit software I
still have is from 1999 and would not be transferred to a new PC in any
case as it runs on its own dedicated machine. I have seen some software
which has a 16-bit installer, but even that software worked if the files
were simply copied from another PC. A note to the author quickly resulted
in a 32-bit installer version!

I do hear that some hardware manufacturers have been rather late in
producing drivers for their hardware, and I may be about to encounter that
problem myself with a new PC install for someone else shortly.

Cheers,
David

michael adams wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...

: Too bad, the M6 and prior Leica's were favoured by combat correspondents
: and photogs for their reliability, simplicity, compactness not to
: mention image quality.

Indeed.

All Leica were trying to do was try and maintain the qualities
for which they've always been renowed, in the face of the totally
different demands being made on the familiar body shape by digital
reproduction.

It's not particularly edyifying to watch people jumpimg up and down
in glee over their failure, in what's turned out to be a difficult if not
impossible task.

Don't count me as 'gleeful'. It's always a benefit to the industry to
have companies dedicated to excellence.

(OTOH: it is a bucket of cooling water for those blinded by faith).

Leica, from the linked report, did not do enough design engineering,
user consultation and user testing before release. They were under very
high pressure to get their camera into the market as film camera sales
were all but dead.

Leica, although posting rare earnings in the last two years after 5 or
more of losses (and forecasting a loss this year and 'maybe' break even
next year) made the error of rushing the M8 to market before it was
really ready for photographers.

Yes it cost far too much, yes it turned out to be a pile of crap,
yes Leica were the Nazis camera of choice, but it was a noble enterprise
neverthless IMO.

Americans, Brits and many others (military and other agencies) did not
throw out their extensive inventory of Zeiss and Leica (and other)
equipment in the war; but used same to good measure (Likewise Browning
in Utah used to send the "HP" pistol to Germany complete to engraved
eagle and swastika before the war...)

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:54:15 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

Bõwser wrote:
"Allen" wrote in message
[]
It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have
bought Leitz.
Allen

And here's the worst part: I have Vista 64 loaded on three machines,
none of them have ever failed. All run perfectly.

Strange that - I had just the same experience with Vista 32 here. Must be
something in the mains!

The most common complaint I hear/see about Vista is not about the
stability of the OS, but about compatibility of older programs with
this OS. Many of us have older ("older" in the computer sense of
being purchased one year or more ago) programs that we don't want to
upgrade to fit a new OS.

True that...

Where I work, we have two enterprise apps that need to be updated, which
means pushing a new app or two out to 80,000 seats. But the IT Security
folks want to make the move to Vista sooner, not later, so away we go...


If I was concerned only with the stability/functional aspects of an
OS, I'd have no problem buying a new computer with Vista. It's the
integration with my extant programs that concern me.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...

: Too bad, the M6 and prior Leica's were favoured by combat correspondents
: and photogs for their reliability, simplicity, compactness not to
: mention image quality.

Indeed.

All Leica were trying to do was try and maintain the qualities
for which they've always been renowed, in the face of the totally
different demands being made on the familiar body shape by digital
reproduction.

It's not particularly edyifying to watch people jumpimg up and down
in glee over their failure, in what's turned out to be a difficult if not
impossible task.

Don't count me as 'gleeful'. It's always a benefit to the industry to
have companies dedicated to excellence.

(OTOH: it is a bucket of cooling water for those blinded by faith).

Leica, from the linked report, did not do enough design engineering,
user consultation and user testing before release. They were under very
high pressure to get their camera into the market as film camera sales
were all but dead.


Leica, although posting rare earnings in the last two years after 5 or
more of losses (and forecasting a loss this year and 'maybe' break even
next year) made the error of rushing the M8 to market before it was
really ready for photographers.

Yes it cost far too much, yes it turned out to be a pile of crap,
yes Leica were the Nazis camera of choice, but it was a noble enterprise
neverthless IMO.

Americans, Brits and many others (military and other agencies) did not
throw out their extensive inventory of Zeiss and Leica (and other)
equipment in the war; but used same to good measure (Likewise Browning
in Utah used to send the "HP" pistol to Germany complete to engraved
eagle and swastika before the war...)

I was possibly a bit over-hasty there. While Leicas with Eagles and
Swastikas are well known, and prized as collectors' items, apparently
some members of the Leitz family were instrumental (no pun intended)
in helping Jews escape their otherwise inevitable fate. Although there
were rumours that it was at Eishenhower's request as a pre-war Leica
owner, that the factories be spared in bombing raids, in fact they were
already earmarked as being useful in helping in post-war German
reconstruction. I discoverd all this 5 minutes after making the rather
glib Nazi remark. They also like Becks beer in the U-Boats as
confirmed by many photographs - Leica presumably in "U-Boot Krieg".

It would have been nice to think that that classic shape of rangefinder
camera could have survived into the digital age, nevertheless.


michael adams

....





--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:51:11 -0400, Böwser wrote:

OK, I think it's time to nominate the Leica M8 as "Turkey of the Decade."

http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00QTrU

Aparently, if you mount this thing on a tripod and shoot vertically, it
falls apart. Yes, really.

My sympathies to any of you who shelled out $5K for this trash.

From:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...tml#post632457

I inserted some missing currency conversions.

===============================

"Quoted today repair estimate...

Well, I got the reply from Leica about my camera with broken bottom plate.
Talked to the importer today, and they quoted Leica HQ's repair estimate at

NOK 6,726 plus VAT = NOK 8,407.50 ( equivalent to USD 1,553.11)

Quite a bill... Includes labour NOK 5,636 (USD $1,041.40), material NOK 840 (USD
$155.21), shipping NOK 250 (USD $46.17) plus VAT (25%). Comments were "Impact
damage. A piece of the camera housing is broken off." Also got the same on the
snail mail today. I knew it would be frustrating when the 'repair charge' would
be quoted, since the 'impact damage' all happened while the camera was swiveling
on the tripod, and I consider this to be of normal use. The camera was never
dropped so the body shell is scratch free. My Norwegian importer says this was
'the first such case' they have seen. Well, I tried to be as impartial as
possible on my reporting to the forum of what happened. So there. Think need to
cool off my head.

oslo terry"

===========================


Total cost for the body alone is now well in excess of $6,500, and it still
takes crappy photos worse than any $100 P&S camera. That's true for 100% of all
M8s, the cracking body only happens to some, so far. After that repair cost it
still has the body defect that will crack again if you put it on a tripod in
portrait orientation, which Leica conveniently calls abnormal use / abuse of the
camera.

Four forum participants have so far reported the same problem (a fraction of a
percent of all M8 owners), and also reported to Leica who claim they've never
heard of this happening before.

7,080 hits if you do a Google search with:

leica m8 (baseplate OR base-plate OR latch OR shell OR cover) (cracked OR broken
OR failure)

This is the sign of a company trying to undermine itself and call it quits. The
CEOs must be transferring funds into something more lucrative today, like their
pockets.

Anyone getting their M8 repaired only brings to mind that saying about a fool
throwing their good money after bad. A repaired cracked body isn't going to fix
those useless images that it creates.