Leica 007 - A Warning To Potential Buyers

[mjr]

Definitely seems like a real issue with your camera, I could shoot aurora at night with the 007 by just setting infinity on the top screen and never once did I have an issue with focus. I shot a lot of business portraits with both the 006 and 007 which is very easy to do with the viewfinder, either af or mf but relied completely on the dof scale for landscape and architecture work and always spot on.

I'd say to your dealer that if Leica say it is within tolerances then they should have no issue with you shooting another body side by side, I'm confident it will be obvious that yours has an issue. It's a shame because it's such a brilliant system, I'm tempted to pick up a cheap 006 again just for portraits as it was so good.

Mat

 

[ErikKaffehr]

There were a few quirks and niggles that I thought I would get accustomed to, or that would be ironed out in future firmware releases so I set aside my existing line of Hasselblad lenses and dumped $85,000 on a new Leica system!

The problems began in the first month. The camera is unable to focus accurately. I recently tested the 70mm lens on a black can of deodorant on a white background. In 16 frames the camera returned 6 different distances ranging from 1.5 metres to 10 meters. The actual distance was closer to 3 metres.


The camera has been back to Germany 3 times in 10 months for checking. They assure me it's within technical specifications but I continue to send them examples of out of focus images. They have also advised me the lens barrel markings and LCD distance should not be used to set focus but instead live view should be used in all situations in which focus is critical (I would think for any photographer focus is critical for EVERY image).

So, Leica says that your camera is within specs...

Hmm...

My take is that if barrel marking don't match real focusing distance, why have them at all. The LCD distance should be reasonably accurate.

I would suggest that it is appropriate to expect every shot in near perfect focus. You are buying into a system that claims to have the greatest lenses. That is absolutely no use if you don't get accurate focus.

The suggestion to use magnified live view for accurate focus is a good one. I love magnified live view…

Some time ago, I was shooting with my Hasselblad 555/ELD. The image below is a central crop at 1:1 view. There is a sign saying 'TEGELSTUGAN'. I use a Hasselblad PM90 viewfinder with an additional Zeiss 3X monocular, and that sign was not even visible. How would you focus on something that you cannot even see? In this case I used the split image on the white beam left of the door and that gave the focusing acuity I needed.



So my points are:

1. AF needs to be accurate
2. Barrel markings should be accurate, if they are not useful they have no 'raison de étre'
3. Distance info and DoF markings need to be accurate

So, if your camera has been back to Leica three times and was found to be 'within specs' you may ask about the relevance of those specs.

Best regards
Erik

 

[justalexander]

Thanks for all your input.

I admit I've never shot two bodies side by side, but when I had the loan bodies I still recall having focus issues. Leica had my body 3 times and say it's within specification. For this they use a lab with perfect lighting and a perfect black/white target at a fairly close distance. In these perfect conditions the camera was likely to autofocus correctly, however they didn't say whether the lens barrel, LCD, live view and subject to camera distances all correlated.

Regardless of whether it is within specifications, this may also have to be questioned. Leica released the M8 with faulty IR filter, Nikon and Canon have had problems and Samsung just lost billions after the Galaxy Note 7 disaster. In each case I'm sure each product was tested exhaustively before being released onto the market.

The distance info on the barrel is indeed it's raison de étre, and with the LCD distance scale showing 2 decimal places you would hope for extra accuracy. I also purchased the split micro prism but unfortunately it sometimes doesn't correlate with the autofocus and live view.

However it's not JUST the focus problems. If you read my earlier posts you will see I'm on to my third battery charger, fourth usb cable. There are examples of light leaks/reflections onto the sensor, banding, strange blobs all over the sensor, bugs in firmware updates, and Leica's general failure to invest in the S system (how much time was spent releasing the Q in a titanium finish, the M in ping pong rubber and a red lens!)

Ultimately I think I pulled the lemon from the fruit bowl. It's nice to hear some users have no problems because I think it's CAPABLE of being an great system, not without its problems even when working properly, but a great all-round camera.

 

[dougpeterson]

Where is your dealer in all this?

When an end-customer has an issue with a manufacturer the worst* they can do is threaten to with-hold their (individual) business. When a dealer has an issue with the manufacturer they can threaten to with-hold their (entire dealerships') business.

In addition, value added partners also build back-channel relationships/trust/credibility that come in handy in the especially sticky situations. When you've been out drinking (many times) with the head of service, or the VP of sales, or the head of R+D of a company sometimes you can get problems resolved that otherwise seem intractable.

Every manufacturer I've worked with values customer service and generally get things right (some more than others of course). But every one, including the best ones, has also failed to do so at least once; at least before we added our own pressure.

A good dealer also has a lot of in-the-weeds experience and the capability to do comparison tests against multiple units to see what is normal and what is "in spec" based on real-world performance, as well as a good understanding of where the limits of each piece of gear is and how to best work around those limits. When the head of support of a good dealer calls a manufacturer to report a problem the manufacturer knows (to a much greater extent than with an "unknown individual user") that the issue is not user error or wrong expectations.

Some dealers also receive repairs back from the manufacturer (rather than it being sent directly back to the customer) so that if the issue isn't resolved it isn't the client's time/energy that is spent identifying that the problem is still there.

I don't know what of the issues you're pointing out are normal and what issues are expectations/limitations/user-error. I'm not a Leica expert, but from nine years of experience in this I can tell you it's VERY hard to know that without direct/meaningful access to the equipment in question and time/understanding/relationship with the user. Even things that look like "obvious" problems with equipment are in fact user error of some kind, and sometimes things that look like "obvious" user error are actually equipment problems.

This is my experience working at two large medium format dealers over the last nine years.

Sending good thoughts your way, hoping you resolve your frustrations!

*Short of suing or mounting a bad-PR campaign

 

[justalexander]

Where is your dealer in all this?

When an end-customer has an issue with a manufacturer the worst* they can do is threaten to with-hold their (individual) business. When a dealer has an issue with the manufacturer they can threaten to with-hold their (entire dealerships') business.

In addition, value added partners also build back-channel relationships/trust/credibility that come in handy in the especially sticky situations. When you've been out drinking (many times) with the head of service, or the VP of sales, or the head of R+D of a company sometimes you can get problems resolved that otherwise seem intractable.

Every manufacturer I've worked with values customer service and generally get things right (some more than others of course). But every one, including the best ones, has also failed to do so at least once; at least before we added our own pressure.

A good dealer also has a lot of in-the-weeds experience and the capability to do comparison tests against multiple units to see what is normal and what is "in spec" based on real-world performance, as well as a good understanding of where the limits of each piece of gear is and how to best work around those limits. When the head of support of a good dealer calls a manufacturer to report a problem the manufacturer knows (to a much greater extent than with an "unknown individual user") that the issue is not user error or wrong expectations.

Some dealers also receive repairs back from the manufacturer (rather than it being sent directly back to the customer) so that if the issue isn't resolved it isn't the client's time/energy that is spent identifying that the problem is still there.

I don't know what of the issues you're pointing out are normal and what issues are expectations/limitations/user-error. I'm not a Leica expert, but from nine years of experience in this I can tell you it's VERY hard to know that without direct/meaningful access to the equipment in question and time/understanding/relationship with the user. Even things that look like "obvious" problems with equipment are in fact user error of some kind, and sometimes things that look like "obvious" user error are actually equipment problems.

This is my experience working at two large medium format dealers over the last nine years.

Sending good thoughts your way, hoping you resolve your frustrations!

*Short of suing or mounting a bad-PR campaign

My dealer was initially very helpful, and they continue to be. However after the camera came back from Germany for the THIRD time all they will say now is that it's within Leica Germany's technical specifications; they're willing to send it back for a FOURTH time in 11 months and give me a loaner; and that I should not be using/relying on the lens barrel markings or LCD for distance but instead use live view to focus. In the end they're just following Leica Germany's instructions.

I've attached a screenshot I took 2 weeks ago showing how inaccurate the focusing system (as a whole) is. Live view and the camera are telling me the building is 5.01 metres away, however as you can see from the underlying image the building is at least 3 TIMES that distance!!! The live view magnification is of timber screens on the second story of the house which is hidden by the live view window.

I'd love to sue or mount a bad PR campaign, but in the end all I want is the camera Leica promised. If Leica refuse to play ball however I will be forced to sue because I can't afford to have $85,000 of equipment which doesn't perform.

 

[PeterA]

My dealer was initially very helpful, and they continue to be. However after the camera came back from Germany for the THIRD time all they will say now is that it's within Leica Germany's technical specifications; they're willing to send it back for a FOURTH time in 11 months and give me a loaner; and that I should not be using/relying on the lens barrel markings or LCD for distance but instead use live view to focus. In the end they're just following Leica Germany's instructions.

I've attached a screenshot I took 2 weeks ago showing how inaccurate the focusing system (as a whole) is. Live view and the camera are telling me the building is 5.01 metres away, however as you can see from the underlying image the building is at least 3 TIMES that distance!!! The live view magnification is of timber screens on the second story of the house which is hidden by the live view window.

I'd love to sue or mount a bad PR campaign, but in the end all I want is the camera Leica promised. If Leica refuse to play ball however I will be forced to sue because I can't afford to have $85,000 of equipment which doesn't perform.

First thing I would do is get another body and see if it has the same problems - your dealer should be able to organise a second body for you and perhaps work with you to test this out in direct comparison with your current body. Same dealer shoudl work with you to prepare a report on the camera with SPECIFIC faults, backed up by appropriate proofs which they send through to appropriate persons in the Leica system.

I don't think you are helping your case much threatening legal action and telling everyone who reads a public forum about how incompetent Leica have been - when it is unclear from your own writings what your issue is - apart from extreme buyer regret and a preference for Mercedes SUV's.

Better process in terms of resolving issues will see a better outcome for you.

All the best
Pete

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Lloyd Chambers, more known as Diglloyd has reported AF issues on the Leica S2 and as I recall also on the Leica S. He also had a client having serious issues with his S (it was an S I think).

https://diglloyd.com/blog/2015/20150728_2330-LeicaS-autofocusError.html

I no longer subscribe to Diglloyd, for a couple of reasons.

Just to say, Lloyd Chambers is often finding issues with AF-systems not being accurate for critical work.

Having the camera sent back for three times to Germany, I think you have done what could be done.

Best regards
Erik

Thanks for all your input.

I admit I've never shot two bodies side by side, but when I had the loan bodies I still recall having focus issues. Leica had my body 3 times and say it's within specification. For this they use a lab with perfect lighting and a perfect black/white target at a fairly close distance. In these perfect conditions the camera was likely to autofocus correctly, however they didn't say whether the lens barrel, LCD, live view and subject to camera distances all correlated.

Regardless of whether it is within specifications, this may also have to be questioned. Leica released the M8 with faulty IR filter, Nikon and Canon have had problems and Samsung just lost billions after the Galaxy Note 7 disaster. In each case I'm sure each product was tested exhaustively before being released onto the market.

The distance info on the barrel is indeed it's raison de étre, and with the LCD distance scale showing 2 decimal places you would hope for extra accuracy. I also purchased the split micro prism but unfortunately it sometimes doesn't correlate with the autofocus and live view.

However it's not JUST the focus problems. If you read my earlier posts you will see I'm on to my third battery charger, fourth usb cable. There are examples of light leaks/reflections onto the sensor, banding, strange blobs all over the sensor, bugs in firmware updates, and Leica's general failure to invest in the S system (how much time was spent releasing the Q in a titanium finish, the M in ping pong rubber and a red lens!)

Ultimately I think I pulled the lemon from the fruit bowl. It's nice to hear some users have no problems because I think it's CAPABLE of being an great system, not without its problems even when working properly, but a great all-round camera.

 

[ZHNL]

Check out this thread in LUF
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/256088-s-006-focus-error/

I noticed S camera AF problem as well. Basically, it has real problems to deal with fine detail focusing subject such as small leaf, grass etc at long distance for those situation, I get very consistent AF fail. For general use, I also find reliability issue like OP report. For same subject, I don't get consistent AF results. Even for high contrast stuff(you would think), I also can get AF failure sometime. I also remember the AF system has different sensitivity to vertical or horizontal subject suggest AF point is not cross typed.

As Roger suggested, I usually just manual focus whenever I have enough time to do that. If not, I always virtually check AF before capture. for critical shot, I also make sure focus after capture. (I was burned once to find out that some of my shots from Zion was off even I though and AF point is well defined)

I have used S2 and S006 and S007. I sent my S006 to Leica just want make sure my unit is in spec. (I expect to be told it is even though I see lots of problem) In the time of sending the units. I got loan units of S2P and S007, The problem is there for every units I can hold off. The reason I know it is in spec because it can lock focus if you really give it well defend target. and I know it is in spec because I know spec is sloppy.

I was hoping S007 will improve upon this problem, but it is not. And focusing distance scale in LCD is a gimmick at best in my field use. Totally BS. For same target, I can get all kind of reading. It is not a surprise as AF doesn't know where the target is at, how can it report good results. This directly turn off all my S007 desire. I prefer 006 color anyway.

I especially hate it AF implementation of hyper focusing. I notice at small aperture, if camera detect the focusing point is within DOF window, it will not re-engage the focusing. It is really annoy that I have to Wide open the aperture to re engage the AF. This is a big flaw to me as no way the camera know what is optimized DOF window I want cover, where is my main subject I want absolutely in focus. and I think this pose a huge problem in field for me. For landscape, you will assume the lens focus at WO so that you can choose hyper focus point yourself to cover DOF. this way you can use best suitable aperture for the IQ. (S glass is capable shoot landscape WO at low light if no DOF need cover) but many case I have no idea where is the camera focusing point if it is not re engage the focusing.

For me, I don't have any other system approaching the file quality I can get from S glass and sensor combined.(I test pretty much all 35mm system) The CCD color are beautiful, 2nd to none) the OVF are the best. Shooting experience is nothing can touch it. All this overcome the flaw for me, especially I really enjoy manual focus shooting. (And AF seems works fine at portrait distance say 2~3m for 70mm, 1~2m for 35mm or 2~4m for 100mm, as DOF is bigger enough to overcome loss AF tolerance. closer than that, I mostly manual)

If you set expectation to be about AF performance of old medium format film or Digital, you will probably be fine. If you compare S to modern Canikon, you will for sure be disappointed with its performance.

 

[mjr]

I've attached a screenshot I took 2 weeks ago showing how inaccurate the focusing system (as a whole) is. Live view and the camera are telling me the building is 5.01 metres away, however as you can see from the underlying image the building is at least 3 TIMES that distance!!! The live view magnification is of timber screens on the second story of the house which is hidden by the live view window.

Looking at the screenshot you posted, it would appear that the foliage on the left is in focus, much closer than 5m away, I'd guess the scale is showing that you are focused at the hyperfocal point for f8, which is why you have so much depth of field in front of the building, hyperfocal point is likely 5m away. Have you tried as an experiment, shooting wide open at the building or something a decent distance away to see how it acts? I know with my S that when I wanted max dof I'd be shooting at hyperfocal at f11 and be getting everything in focus, depending on the lens that could be pretty close, with the 24 it was something like 3m/4m away (can't really remember)

I think you have become focused on the distance scales and what they are showing at f8 because the whole thing is getting you down, I have a feeling there is just some learning of the system to be done, that of course doesn't excuse the other issues you've had, I can't relate because I didn't have any issues with the ancillary bits and bobs!

Good luck.

Mat

 

[fotografz]

I had formulated some theories about use of the S camera that may help (if not the OP, then perhaps others who've experienced performance issues).

This morning I pulled out the S(006) to put those theories to the test and ...

MY CS35/2.5 FAILED ON START UP!

DISAPPOINTED!

Frankly, I've had so many S lens failures, I cannot recall if the 35 was one of them ... but I'm pretty sure this lens was already sent in for AF failure some time ago. I'll have to check on that. If so, then Leica's fix isn't fixing the issue ... at least earlier fixes didn't.

Moving on:

I wonder if anyone has experienced a lens failure while shooting, or are all AF failures on start up, or while changing lenses on a camera that is powered on?

I had read that the improved firmware addressing AF performance had increased the torque to much for the gearing ... torque especially evident on start-up (which perhaps could be made worse if a lens had sat for some time and was a bit more stiff). So, I thought maybe manually exercising the lens before AF might mitigate the stress.

I also thought that setting the lens on infinity might help since the lenses do that on start-up ... however when I manually set the 35 to infinity this AM, it went slightly past infinity which may be a sign that the gearing had become decoupled.

It's a mystery.

And a damned shame.

Here we go again ... once more into the breech.

Sigh.

- Marc

 

[D&A]

I'm sure those who have experienced Leica S lens failures along the lines Marc and many others have described have attempted many rituals to try and avoid this from happening. May I add one suggestion that may have absolutely no validity or preventitive value. Seems from what I've been hearing and which Marc astutely suggested, powering on the camera might be in part the culprit to the issue.

Although as silly as suggesting for one to stand on one leg while photographing, what if the camera is powered up with a body cap on, and then a lens is afixed to the body while camera is already powered up? Might that sequence expose the lens to a different senario than powering up the camera with a lens already attached to the body?

If powering up was part of the issue contributing to lens failure with regard to torque of some sort applied to the lens gear, ever since a previous firmware revision addressing the cameras AF performance, I would assume another firmware revision might in part address whatever stress the body is initially putting on the lens or its gearing?

I'm sure its a complicated issue that if easy to fix, would have been successfully addressed by now. Sad that such a wonderful and capable system is being hampered by some of these reported issues.

Dave (D&A)

 

[fotografz]

Dave, it doesn't matter is the camera is already on and you attach the lens, or you power up with the lens attached. Either way, the protocol activates the lens AF in an initial maneuver to set the focus at infinity.

My thought was to exercise the lens manually before turning on the camera to avoid stiffness due to lack of use, and set it to infinity to avoid that initial torque.

Didn't work for the 35 that just failed. When I gently exercised that lens manually before use, I could feel that it was a bit to easy to move the focus ring compared to others.

Odd as it sounds, it seems the failure happens in the bag. However, discussions about storage procedures have come to no conclusion. No matter how the stuff is stored, it fails.

Perhaps, when you shut off the camera and remove the lens, something takes place that sets it up for failure. Who knows? It is a mystery.

The upshot of it all is that a part is failing ... no matter how, when, or where ... it fails with no discernible rhyme or reason ... it is the part failing.

The question is whether Leica is just replacing the part with the same old part ... or are they now installing a new part that solves the problem?

- Marc

 

[mjr]

It is bloody annoying for sure, I received a brand new 24mm and an ex-demo 120mm in the same delivery which both failed out of the box, neither worked when mounting to the camera which I found ridiculous, both were replaced within 48hrs thanks to the dealer but still. Maybe the solution is not turning the camera on at all, leave it in the bag!

Mat

 

[D&A]

Thank you for the additIonal explanation Marc. Many times I have been tempted to switch over to the S system having used it on a temporary/loaner basis on quite a few occasions but each time have been stopped in my tracks with the repeated experience of various issues and failures of the system but none more troubling than this lens failure issue.

Whats both scary and of great concern is the repeated failures to the same lens after its been returned from repair. Unless they recently they have imemented a new or different fix, it appears they are replacing the defective part with an identical one.

Leica at the very least in my opinion needs to issue further statements regarding these lenses and the steps now currently being taken to avoid such failures from reoccuring in the future.

One additonal question I have asked myself based on feedback and experiences from others, is if these lens failures started to occur primarily when a particular firmware update was implemented on S bodies to improve AF performance, why hasn't Leica addressed this through firmware modification along with a more robust part in the lens that gets repeatedly replaced. Seems like this issue is multifacited and regardless if system is used for pleasure or business, just the fact of knowing lens failure might be imminent at any moment, would be nerve-racking to say the least.

Dave (D&A)

 

[justalexander]

First thing I would do is get another body and see if it has the same problems - your dealer should be able to organise a second body for you and perhaps work with you to test this out in direct comparison with your current body. Same dealer shoudl work with you to prepare a report on the camera with SPECIFIC faults, backed up by appropriate proofs which they send through to appropriate persons in the Leica system.

I don't think you are helping your case much threatening legal action and telling everyone who reads a public forum about how incompetent Leica have been - when it is unclear from your own writings what your issue is - apart from extreme buyer regret and a preference for Mercedes SUV's.

Better process in terms of resolving issues will see a better outcome for you.

All the best
Pete

Hi Pete, if you'd taken the time to read my posts, including pictures, you'd have a pretty good idea of what my issues are. I could also regurgitate the last 11 months of communication between myself and Leica but I don't think you'd bother reading it so what's the point!

With regards to threatening legal action, I'm well within my rights. My camera has been to Germany 3 times and I continue to send Leica DNG files for them to analyse. Most countries in the world have lemon laws (including Australia). In some European countries if an item requires repair more than 3 times there is an automatic termination of the contract.

And which one of my previous posts listing the problems and providing examples didn't you understand? I could regurgitate the last 11 months of communication between Leica and myself but as you cant even read a few posts I don't see the point in boring you dozens of pages of emails. There is also no extreme buyer regret or a preference for an SUV, just an illustration that the contents of many of our camera bags costs more than a 2 tonne luxury SUV. I'm certain that if you'd spent $85,000 on something only to suffer problems on a daily bases for 11 months you'd have told someone else by now! In my case I've spent 11 months trying to resolve the issue with Leica and have only just made my thoughts public... which is my right as a consumer.

Maybe Samsung Galaxy users shouldn't be able to return their cameras without giving specific information as to HOW it exploded even though if it has clearly exploded. Or Volkswagen should be allowed to continue breaking the law. And the lithium batteries that caught fire on Boeing 787 aircraft should be left there and not replaced. Or cars with faulty airbags, brakes or transmissions shouldn't be recalled?

I suggest you take some of your own medicine, and next time you purchase something that breaks or doesn't work as expected you just accept the loss without trying to return, replace or repair the item.

 

[justalexander]

Looking at the screenshot you posted, it would appear that the foliage on the left is in focus, much closer than 5m away, I'd guess the scale is showing that you are focused at the hyperfocal point for f8, which is why you have so much depth of field in front of the building, hyperfocal point is likely 5m away. Have you tried as an experiment, shooting wide open at the building or something a decent distance away to see how it acts? I know with my S that when I wanted max dof I'd be shooting at hyperfocal at f11 and be getting everything in focus, depending on the lens that could be pretty close, with the 24 it was something like 3m/4m away (can't really remember)

I think you have become focused on the distance scales and what they are showing at f8 because the whole thing is getting you down, I have a feeling there is just some learning of the system to be done, that of course doesn't excuse the other issues you've had, I can't relate because I didn't have any issues with the ancillary bits and bobs!

Good luck.

Mat

Hi Mat

The camera focuses at it's widest aperture and Live View shows the actual focus distance. The LCD shows the hyper focal distance which I've just checked is between 2.96 metres and 16.43 metres when the focus is set at 5.01 metres. In that example I was shooting with the 24mm, a subject that was approximately 25 metres from camera and so this would pretty much cover the depth of field from the foliage to the building. In one of my preview posts I showed an example of how setting the focus at infinity to shoot a building 500m away was more out of focus than using live view which had the building in focus when the camera indicated it was 8 metres away.

Not everything works as it should. That's why there are lemon laws. I've maintained a very good relationship with the local rep and have been trying to solve the problem amicably. When it works, it works beautifully, but when it doesn't it's a threat to my career. To say that no company produces a lemon would be a fallacy. Even Apple with their unlimited budgets and incredible engineering produce lemons, and it often requires a public outcry for them to respond.

 

[mjr]

Frustrating to say the least!

Something I did when I was having issues is strike up a relationship with Leica's in house S specialist for my region, really nice chap, I even had him use my third replacement S for a few days before shipping it to me and got him to send me raw files so I was happy before it left, this seemed to work. I also got hold of the email addresses for the board of directors and CEO and sent them a detailed email explaining that as a professional, my business relied on them to provide me with products that work, I then asked them not to bother sending me any more replacement equipment if they weren't 100% sure it would work. This got an immediate response from one of the top guys, followed by daily calls until the new camera and lenses were shipped back to me, I did kick up quite a fuss though, I was happy with the outcome and always had a full kit on loan whilst things we being sorted so it didn't affect my work directly. I did have an issue with the regional rep here, after I had returned 2 lenses and 2 bodies, he emailed me to say that his team was going beyond what was reasonable to help me and I should be happy about that, once I had pointed out that I wasn't asking them to do anything other than provide me with a working piece of equipment that I had paid a lot of money for and they certainly weren't doing me any favours, he agreed and apologised, some people will just try and get away with what they can and need to be told when they are wrong.

Best of luck with getting things sorted, as you rightly pointed out, when on song, the files are just amazing, it's why I stuck through the issues and ultimately have very high regard for the system, others like you have been less lucky.

Mat

 

[erlingmm]

Sad to hear all this. I have had S2, S006 and now S007 without any camera problems, I have had a couple of lens AF issues, which have been sorted out smoothly by the local Leica rep. But all this takes a toll on a system that is perfect for me - I have taken it to icy Northern Norway, safari in Africa, big cities in the US and Europe, weddings and family, and I just love it.

 

[Speedgraphic]

I really do hope you get your issues sorted out or at least a good portion of your money back. But my next question would be what on earth were you thinking by trusting Leica? This is a company that makes charming little products and some truly fabulous lenses. This is NOT a company that makes reliable digital products. The "Leica Service" thread in this very forum is filled with S system horror stories. If you are a rich guy who wants to take the best possible pictures of your kids and flowers, then sure, a 007 and 100/2 Summicron is the kit for you. If you need to rely on a product that works, come on! Hasselblad, Phase One, Pentax. You could have purchased 2 645z bodies and the FABULOUS 28-45 AND sourced the rare but lovely 25/4 for less than the investment required of an S kit. Why did you need a demo when you were already invested in Hasselblad? It's basically what you have but a little better. From the perspective of the camera body, the Pentax is MUCH more stable than anything currently available. Even if you were unsatisfied with the Hasselblad you know they make good on their service and warranty promises. Sending anything to Germany is a black hole. If you want to own a Leica my advice would have been to get an M and enjoy it for what it is. I believe they called it S because their intention was to "Squander" any and all potential of the game changing design by implementing poor reliability and the worst after-market service in the business.

 

[Yevgeny NP]

I had formulated some theories about use of the S camera that may help (if not the OP, then perhaps others who've experienced performance issues).

This morning I pulled out the S(006) to put those theories to the test and ...

MY CS35/2.5 FAILED ON START UP!

DISAPPOINTED!

Frankly, I've had so many S lens failures, I cannot recall if the 35 was one of them ... but I'm pretty sure this lens was already sent in for AF failure some time ago. I'll have to check on that. If so, then Leica's fix isn't fixing the issue ... at least earlier fixes didn't.

Moving on:

I wonder if anyone has experienced a lens failure while shooting, or are all AF failures on start up, or while changing lenses on a camera that is powered on?



- Marc

Marc,

From my experience, all the AF failures happened on start up. The last failure happened with my S-Summicron on the start up, when mounted on my SL with the S-SL adapter.

I don't own the S 007 nor S 006, I have an old S2-P with pretty old firmware and my S120, S24 went to Leica because of the AF failures. Because my S100 failed on the SL, I don't think it's a camera or firmware problem.

I stopped looking for any failure pattern, I just carry a Contax adapter and the 55mm and 120mm Contax 645 lenses as a backup solution. I don't know for how long.

Yevgeny