Is this a write off?

[Richard Marks]

Well I was out snapping this morning when in very strong winds at the top of a 1300m hill, my tripod blew over. The attached M8 landed in pretty soft clay, but the force was enough to completely shear the base plate from the body. The plate itself has torn, but a piece of the body material at the other side has also come off. Obviously this was a rather unfortunate accident, but I must say i really do not think the M8 quite cuts it on build quality. Ive had an FM2, Leica R8, Hasselblad, Mamiya and also my trusty M6 all of which have taken many a knock without any trouble. Looks like I might be shooting rather a lot of film whilst my M8 visits Germany for Christmas.

Best wishes


Richard

52551

52552

[ChrisN]

Yow! Bad luck! The casing does look pretty thin where the it has broken away - I'd say it is designed to be strong enough to hold the baseplate on firmly and take knocks applied to the baseplate, but not to be strong enough to support the stresses involved when attached to a tripod and whacked into the ground.

I'm sure Leica can replace the body - It's up to them as to whether they will do that at a price that makes it feasible. The weakness certainly needs to be brought to their attention.

[crawdiddy]

Most unfortunate, indeed. Makes me wonder what else happened inside.

But mostly I think, why does the baseplate come off on an M8? Is that where batteries and memory chips are loaded?

Please excuse my ignorance of such high-tech (and high-priced) gadgetry.

[Gabriel M.A.]

I've read about this issue elsewhere; it is unacceptable.

I think this is another reason why I like to use half-cases, and why I don't like tripods.

[Richard Marks]

Im never going to use a tripod again:). Good luck with the repair. I cant understand why they havent made the thing where you hook the baseplate on like the old bodies. It looks much more fragile on the M8.

DIY ghetto solution would be to use gaffer tape to hold the baseplate on;).

Yes Erik There is a really good 'heal' on the M6 plate which is obviously reinforced. presumably that has evolved for a reason. Why on earth have they changed it?

I must admit I do not use my film M on a tripod but for lansdcapes with digital it alows me to expose the same shot at different exposures to merge them later if lighting is tricky.

Best wishes


Richard

[peter_n]

Wow Richard that is very bad luck but it really is unacceptable that it should shear like that. I thought Leicas were supposed to be built like tanks? Here in the US I think a Passport warranty on a film M would cover that kind of damage, but not necessarily on the M8. Please let us know how this goes for you, and good luck!

[Olsen]

Bad luck, Mark. Sh.. But that design is not good enough. I see on the Leica user forum that many wants another solution - on a future M9 to the bottom plate system than on the M8.

Your M8 will not be easy to fix. If at all possible. I think that Leica should help you out someway. Like offering you a cheap demo model as a compensation.

[Michael M]

I once didn't tighten my digital 20D sufficently to my tripod. I swung the tripod with the camera attched over my shulder only to notice that it suddenly went pretty light and my camera went crashing on the stony path i was walking on ! To my surprise it was still working when i picked it up, luckely it did't fall on the lens .... Don't be worried about your leicas my friends, any camera will brake if it falls in a unfortunate angle and even cheap plastic cameras will survive if fortuna is on your side.

Mike

[Olsen]

With a full car coming home from the dacha, ! opened one of the doors and my 1Ds II fell out and rolled down the hill I live in like an apple. The camera was 'on' and fired an exposure and 'chewed' it's viewfinder screen which fell out of it's bracket. The lense, a 28-70 m 2,8L got a loose inner barrel, but could easily be fixed ($ 150). The camera was OK. I still use the screen, which has some black scratches, - difficult to find a new one. And the camera got some ugly scratches here and there. - It's possibly the ugliest 1Ds II in Norway. Much due to that the surface on the 1Ds II is very easily scratched. Much more so than the previous model; 1Ds.

[Richard Marks]

Well many thanks for all your sympathy. I feel slighly better!
I think the passport should cover this as it specifies "accidental damage" and fortunately my camera is under 1 year old. It will be interesting to see what they do. Im tempted to say its not fit for purpose. Clearly its a cheaper baseplte design than the film version. The other point is that the tripod bush is now in the centre. With the mounting on the right on film M's the fitting was closest to the reinforced end of the plate.

One thing I eluded to earlier was that I am more likely to use a tripod with digital than film for landscapes. Gabriel we all know you do not like tripods but its pretty useful for digital landscapes with bracketing. (not your chosen subject obviously)To be honest I rarely used my film M for landscapes as at the time i used medium format. My M8 replaced that. There are times when a tripod is handy and I think the baseplate design is not up to scratch.

Erik your picture makes the point well. But also the black covering on the M8 is very poor quality compared to the stuff on my M6. The coating has just about worn through to the metal on the M8. This is due to repeatedly taking it in and out of the Leica 1/2 case.

Michael M I take your point but I have had a lot of cameras and travelled very widely and everything else has taken the knocks. Also the tripod was about 2ft 6 height and the ground was pretty soft. All I am saying is that the M8 is not wearing that well.

Olsen I will look carefully before bidding on a used 1ds from Norway!

I think what I am more worried about is that i can not easilly see any way that one could modify the existing M8's to strengthen the base plate. Perhaps we need some response from leica that this is a design fault and that it should be repaired even if out of warranty (some chance). Tim Isaacs where are you now?

Regards


Richard

[furcafe]

Well, the M8 is not simply an M7 w/the guts replaced w/a sensor + extra electronics. While the outer shape resembles other M cameras, Leica evidently had to replace a lot of the old metal parts w/plastic &/or lighter metals. I'm not an engineer so I can't say whether or not it was techically or economically possible to build a more robust design, but there were probably significant constraints imposed by costs & the decision to stick w/the old form factor. Personally, I think they should have abandoned the bottom loading (especially since the bottom on the M8 doesn't even open on the same side as the film M's!).

Best of luck on getting yours fixed (& getting a loaner replacement in the interim).

Yes Erik There is a really good 'heal' on the M6 plate which is obviously reinforced. presumably that has evolved for a reason. Why on earth have they changed it?
Richard

[Richard Marks]

Well, the M8 is not simply an M7 w/the guts replaced w/a sensor + extra electronics. While the outer shape resembles other M cameras, Leica evidently had to replace a lot of the old metal parts w/plastic &/or lighter metals. I'm not an engineer so I can't say whether or not it was techically or economically possible to build a more robust design, but there were probably significant constraints imposed by costs & the decision to stick w/the old form factor. Personally, I think they should have abandoned the bottom loading (especially since the bottom on the M8 doesn't even open on the same side as the film M's!).

You are too kind!
The whole marketing shpeal about the launch was it "does not just feel like an M, it is an M series" remember?

I think the build is cheaper. I can not see any reason why the base plate design would need to be changed. its noweher near the digital stuff.

Richard

[sepiareverb]

It's made of magnesium, lightweight, but not particularly sturdy if I'm recalling magnesium correctly.

[Digital Dude]

Damn! I can’t imagine how that felt although I’m sorry for your loss. Mark has a very good thread “Anatomy of the Leica M8” over on the LUF if you’re interested.
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/21331-anatomy-leica-m8.html
Regards,:(

[SolaresLarrave]

Richard, if anything, you'll come out of this scrap with fate a wiser, more cautious photographer. I'm sure Leica will fix it, but keep your expectations low about a change in design. However, given what you paid and that it's still under warranty, they should let you have a loaner. Check with the store or seller from whom you purchased the camera.

Take care and good luck! :)

[infocusf8@earthlink.]

Richard sorry to hear about your misfortune. My M8 went over on a tripod about a month ago and two passersby gasped as I mentally resigned myself to picking up a rattling box of electronics. Much to my surprise it didn't have a scratch on it and I've had no electronic problems or loss of image quality after a month of constant use.:angel:

[Keith]

I think that where the impact occured was highly instrumental in the resulting breakage and no reflection on Leica at all. The digital camera chassis by necessity is made of a material that will fracture under certain stresses. Magnesium alloy is extremely rigid and dimensionally stable under temperature changes which is very necessary with the M8 ... but it's not malleable at all.

The fact that you can drop a Japanese DSLR onto concrete and probably pick it up and use it has nothing to do with the M8 and it's build quality ... or any perceived weakness in it's design. I just think that at that particular moment all the planets were in the wrong position and random physics took over. :)

[ully]

Wow, you now have a modern bottom loader.

Bad luck but a write off for sure.

[MartinL]

At least you know how the damage happened. I took my M8 out of my 1/2 case (Luigi) after a concert, lowered the monitor flap, and saw that the LCD was fractured ---looking much like a damaged laptop screen. Leica New Jersey had it back in a few weeks. Repair was $320, which seemed reasonable. My 1 yr warranty did not cover this damage, but my camera insurance did.

[nikonhswebmaster]

The weak tripod socket has always been a weakness of the M design. The tripod socket is part of the "back" on the M8 as it is on all other Ms, not connected to the body casting. Any Leica M falling with a tripod can rip off the bottom plate, no matter the design of the catch. But the M8 could have had the socket in the body casting, not sure why they chose to put it in the removable bottom.

Sadly I would rate that design not the best, but to be fair, breaking a body casting is pretty easy unless it is plastic, which will take much more of a beating. On the plus side Leica moved the tripod socket to the center at long last. This would certainly be a warning not to use the socket with long lenses!

Even on a tripod socket like the Nikon SP/S3/S2 where it is screwed to the main body casting, you can still rip it off with a good fall.

http://www.photographyreview.com/channels/photographyreview/data/images/LeicaM8_Bottom.jpg

[Richard Marks]

I think that where the impact occured was highly instrumental in the resulting breakage and no reflection on Leica at all. The digital camera chassis by necessity is made of a material that will fracture under certain stresses. Magnesium alloy is extremely rigid and dimensionally stable under temperature changes which is very necessary with the M8 ... but it's not malleable at all.

The fact that you can drop a Japanese DSLR onto concrete and probably pick it up and use it has nothing to do with the M8 and it's build quality ... or any perceived weakness in it's design. I just think that at that particular moment all the planets were in the wrong position and random physics took over. :)

Keith why is it a necessity that it should fracture for a digital camera?
I have to disagree that this is no reflection on Leica. If you look at the slot in the base plate that inserts into the elevated lug on the left side of the body, the thickness of metal on the upper aspect of the slot is about 1mm. Its just not enough if the camera is tripod mounted as the whole weight of the camera and lens (and possibly even flash gun) is enough to tear it very easilly. Just compare it with the film design. Clearly that 'heal' on the baseplate evolved for a reason.

I am not blaming Leica for the fact that I was caught out by a sudden gust of wind at the top of a big hill. I do agree that the 'planets were in the wrong position etc.' but a good design should be able to take a little adversity in its stride. Leica are keen to appeal to the pro market. Professional equipmment should be able to take the knocks as often one is working very quickly to get shots and safety of equipment (and even self) may be secondary to getting the images. A film M definately meets this. Im now not so sure about the M8. Do not get me wrong I adore my M8 and sold every other bit of camera gear i own to acquire it. I am simply objective about my experiences, give credit where its due, and keen to point out limitations of design for future improvement. Defending something that is inherently badly designed does not do Leica or its customers any long term favours.

I think I will stay in doors today!


Richard

[Keith]

Keith why is it a necessity that it should fracture for a digital camera?
I have to disagree that this is no reflection on Leica. If you look at the slot in the base plate that inserts into the elevated lug on the left side of the body, the thickness of metal on the upper aspect of the slot is about 1mm. Its just not enough if the camera is tripod mounted as the whole weight of the camera and lens (and possibly even flash gun) is enough to tear it very easilly. Just compare it with the film design. Clearly that 'heal' on the baseplate evolved for a reason.

I am not blaming Leica for the fact that I was caught out by a sudden gust of wind at the top of a big hill. I do agree that the 'planets were in the wrong position etc.' but a good design should be able to take a little adversity in its stride. Leica are keen to appeal to the pro market. Professional equipmment should be able to take the knocks as often one is working very quickly to get shots and safety of equipment (and even self) may be secondary to getting the images. A film M definately meets this. Im now not so sure about the M8. Do not get me wrong I adore my M8 and sold every other bit of camera gear i own to acquire it. I am simply objective about my experiences, give credit where its due, and keen to point out limitations of design for future improvement. Defending something that is inherently badly designed does not do Leica or its customers any long term favours.

I think I will stay in doors today!


Richard

Sorry not 'necessary' ... I didn't mean it to sound like it was deliberate. :p

Over the years I have dealt a lot with magnesium alloys and as good as they are in some areas they also have failings. As I said I supect the material was chosen for it's ability retain accuracy under thermal extremes but it does tend to be brittle. Any other M would have bent the material rather than broken it but it's hard to label it as poor design from my point of view. Car wheels are a classic example ... if a genuine magnesium wheel clouts a gutter or even a very large pothole it may break which is a huge safety issue ... yet it's acceptable in a competition environment.

I guess maybe Leica should have chosen a material with more give in it but then it may not have had the rigidity required to keep the sensor etc exactly where it needs to be in relation to the lens mount under stress. It is a bit of a trade off and I do think you were extremely unlucky ... hopefully you won't be out of pocket! I do know that I'll be watching my M8 very carefully when tripod mounted on windy days :eek: ... don't most tripods have the facility to hang a counter weight from the underneath of the centre column?

I read somewhere that the chassis of the M8 is made in Portugal ... the company that makes it is renowned for their expertise in casting and machining of magnesium alloys. :)

[Richard Marks]

Keith
Thanks. I understand.
I am just thinking how this can be improved. Some posters have suggested that the tripod mount is part of the chasis. Perhaps the baseplate itself would then have a central hole and the 'pod would actually mount onto the chasis. (there is a recess inside the body which could be threaded) The alternative is to make the baseplate so it tears off very easilly without pulling a piece of the magnesium body off with it, and have cheaply replaceable base plates.

If we accept that the body must be made from magnesium (for what ever putative reason) it needs to be thicker.

I will of course make this point to leica when sending them my camera. lets see what happens!

Richard

[MartinP]

Trying to be more cheerful (!!), to me it looks as though you just need another base-plate and a rangefinder check. Surely the baseplate doesn't have to be lighttight when there is no film roll in there, so having a bit missing is not so bad. It may well be that the slightly weaker fitting for the baseplate is the fail-point which is designed in to reduce damage to the relatively brittle body parts.

So far as the tripod mount goes, I would have considered attaching it to the main casting with a deliberately "weak" method (tiny screws instead of big ones for example) in order to provide some protection in case of extreme impact but, as it is now, the baseplate fixing does this job.

EDIT: Sorry Richard, looks like we posted the remark about designing in points-of-failure at the same time.

[Keith]

God ... I can see what will happen. It will be like the auto industry ... we'll have cameras with 'crumple zones' even air bags! :p

[Richard Marks]

Trying to be more cheerful (!!), to me it looks as though you just need another base-plate and a rangefinder check. Surely the baseplate doesn't have to be lighttight when there is no film roll in there, so having a bit missing is not so bad. It may well be that the slightly weaker fitting for the baseplate is the fail-point which is designed in to reduce damage to the relatively brittle body parts.

So far as the tripod mount goes, I would have considered attaching it to the main casting with a deliberately "weak" method (tiny screws instead of big ones for example) in order to provide some protection in case of extreme impact but, as it is now, the baseplate fixing does this job.

EDIT: Sorry Richard, looks like we posted the remark about designing in points-of-failure at the same time.

Martin
Replacing the baseplate would not be so bad. The problem is it has torn a piece of the magnesium body as well! The roof of the thin slot sheared off fairly easilly, but at the other end of the plate where the locking mechanism is, the base plate did not shear and it took out a bite of the M8 body instead!

The base plate does not need to be light tight. In fact other than Leica's ironic attempts to make it feel like a film M the baseplate could be completely solid. All that is needed is a cover for the battery and SD card. It need not be that big.

Best wishes

Richard

[StuartR]

Much sympathy Richard! The wind is a cruel mistress. It got the better of me the other day as well. I was out on a lake here in Iceland and the wind was really howling. I was using a Rollei 6008AF and 180mm 2.8 Schneider. This weighs at least 10 pounds. It is like a brick with a coffee can glued on front:
http://www.cameraunion.net/bingqiku/rollei/120slr/images/6008af.jpg

Nevertheless, the wind blew it over, lens first (no filter) into gravel. Amazingly, the gravel slowed it down a bit I guess and there was a metal screw in hood on it. The hood is scraped up and there is a scrape or two on the lens body, but everything else seems to be working fine. Luckily no damage to the glass. But it sure did teach me a lesson. Even if your camera weighs 10+ pounds, that does not mean the wind won't blow it over!

Anyway, I agree with you about the Leica baseplate. It was a novel idea, but it just does not make any sense anymore. The attachments do seem less secure than they were with the film version.

[StuartR]

After all, this camera was not produced to a price point.
What makes you say that? As far as I am aware, it was produced to be under US 5000 at release.

[Richard Marks]

Stuart
Glad to see that your lens is OK. Thank goodness for the lens hood!

Regarding price ad build quality, I am sure corners were cut. If you think about it an M7 with motor winder would cost around £2,400 and the M8 started at £2,990. Clearly the new digital sensor and electronics would not have been cheap and presumably there were huge R and D costs to make the 'impossible' digital rangefinder.

Regarding the idea that it must look and feel like a film M, Im not so sure it has to be identical to the letter. I mean why not make the battery look like a roll of Tri x!! I expect Leica to introduce improvements with advancing technology whilst retaining those things which are proven.

Perhaps we should have one of our sites famous votes on Fixed vs removable M8 base!

Regards

Richard

[MartinP]

I can see what will happen. It will be like the auto industry ... we'll have cameras with 'crumple zones' even air bags! :p


Air-bags . . . thats a great idea !! It would also help if you were in a small boat and dropped the camera over the side, with a suitably dual-purpose trigger for the air-bags of course. And this would be ideal for PJ's covering sinking ships etc - the camera could be self-rescuing. For the after-sales market maybe a small addition to Luigi's (spelling ?) fine cases could be developed. One litre of water weighs a kilogram, so what volume will the protection/flotation bag need for an M-series camera, in order that it will float ?

Where can we find a manufacturer in time for Christmas . . .
;)

[nikonhswebmaster]

Just to be clear, it appears the the base plate catch ripped off a chunk of the body casting. I no longer own an M6~7 to see if it is thicker, but it would be interesting to compare. Bottom line is that the engineers did not design the camera to be dropped attached to a tripod that weighs more than the camera.

The impact may not even be what broke the bottom, but instead the weight of the entire tripod suddenly being put on the bottom plate. If the camera bounced in the soft mud, for a moment the entire torque of the 2 1/2 tripod was put on that little bottom plate.

You cannot really blame the design, it was engineered to support the weight of the camera, and a standard lens, not the weight of a tripod.

But this does bring up some important suggestions when using a tripod. You should never leave a camera unattended on a tripod, unless it is sandbagged. You should have the strap of the camera around your neck, especially when the camera is on a light tripod.

There are any number of ways a tripod can fail, legs slipping, ball head falling forward, etc. For many years everything I shot was on a tripod, in my studio, so I have had it all happen. Tripods need to be set up very carefully, and they need to be sandbagged in wind.

http://www.calumetphoto.com/resources/images/products/ASSET_59715.jpg

Could Leica make this camera stronger, sure, but you can still break any metal casting.

[Richard Marks]

Dear Fred

The casing is marginally thicker on my M6 but it is also reinforced at the curved edges. The wider body of the M8 may also mean that the curve is less stable at the ends and should be thicker. The metal itself looks to be thinner than on my M6 but its composition is probably more the important factor. It feels more 'bendy' than the m6.

All of the precautions that you suggest are much appreciated. The hill that i climbed up (steep 1300m) would have been even worse with sandbags. I do not fancy keeping the strap of the camera round my neck whilst its on a tripod. Obviously one should never leave a camera unattended ..... but this really was just about to change lenses and it really was a split second. I am not sure that your suggestions are entirely realistic. The ground temeperature was 1 degree c but the wind took the temperature quite a bit below freezing. probably a bit different to the studio!!

I am not trying to blame any one for this misshap, and did not require a lecture on camera safety, its just that this particular aspect of the M8's design does seem somewhat inferior to its film based siblings. If it can be improved, it should be!

One the subject of Magnesium, it is a metal subject to metal fatigue, and the amount on the upper aspect of the base plate slot is pretty thin. I would not be suprised to find that it does get quite a bit of stress on it just using the camera on a tripod routinely and it may be that eventually just a small knock may be enough to tear it. This is what we really need to think about.

Best wishes


Richard

[Digital Dude]

...Professional equipmment should be able to take the knocks as often one is working very quickly to get shots and safety of equipment (and even self) may be secondary to getting the images. A film M definately meets this. Im now not so sure about the M8. Do not get me wrong I adore my M8 and sold every other bit of camera gear i own to acquire it. I am simply objective about my experiences, give credit where its due, and keen to point out limitations of design for future improvement. ...

I feel your pain. My MacBook "Pro" is a great computer although it’s the most delicate portable I've ever owned.
Regards,:rolleyes:

[Avotius]

This is the 3rd or 4th time I have heard of this happening, the bottom plate is a serious design flaw. Lets hope Leica gets the picture. In the mean time....are you taking notes Voigtlander/Zeiss?

[peter_n]

I use a tripod with a hook on the bottom of the center column. I hang my camera bag on the hook and it does make a difference when it is blowy.

[Richard Marks]

I have received an e-mail from a fellow user who referred me to the LUF thread May 2007 entitled "base plate failure". Interestingly the point where the tear in the body has occured is in exactly the same place as mine. (The photo looks identical!!). I think this rather supports the notion that there is a design flaw because in this instance there was no history of trauma and it was concluded to be the result of metal fatigue. From a legal point of view if the same problem occurs in the same place on multiple occasions, and does not occur with other models performing in similar circumstances, its faulty (UK sale of goods act)! Can any one recall this relating to film M's?

Richard

[nikonhswebmaster]

Dear Fred
All of the precautions that you suggest are much appreciated....

...I am not trying to blame any one for this misshap, and did not require a lecture on camera safety,

Sorry if I sounded too didactic. The "lecture" was mostly for others. i do think that the M8 is going to be a tough camera to feel comfortable with a light tripod or monopod attached while holding the camera.

In looking at the weakness of the tripod socket, you could bump a monopod on a step or the edge of a building and rip off a chunk of the body casting.

I actually think it is an awful design, you might be able to break it off just by moving a monopod too quickly if it was not vertical. You have to support the camera and tripod/monopod together.

The socket should be screwed to the casting, not the back, as I mentioned it should be done like the Nikon F. (the f cover goes over the speed adjustment in the center of the bottom).

[Richard Marks]

Dear Fred
Apology accepted. Nothing at all wrong with making those points if it helps some one else.
Glad to see you have changed your view from "cant blame it on the design".
I am actually more concerned about metal fatigue than accidental damage as the former occuring out of warranty (say 2 or 3 years down the line) could prove expensive if not terminal. I do agree with you that the socket should be connected to something stronger. Its a bit like towing a trailer connected to the boot (US ? Trunk) rather than a towbar on a car chasis.

Incidentally Stuart R's experience with the Rolleiflex is interesting, easilly 3 Kg of camera blown down in strong winds and nothing dropped off!

Best wishes


Richard

[StuartR]

Incidentally Stuart R's experience with the Rolleiflex is interesting, easilly 3 Kg of camera blown down in strong winds and nothing dropped off!

Best wishes


Richard


Not off the camera anyway....I think I might have lost a bit of weight from it though. :eek:

[nikonhswebmaster]

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/photokina2006/Leica/IMG_0465.jpg

Richard I hope all this discussion of your camera does not seem too trivial. Replacing this casting is not a minor repair.

I really hope that Leica does not make this impossible for you, or that all of us have not taken your distress too lightly. I can only imagine how you must feel.

Please let us know (I am sure you will) if Leica is able to do this repair at a price you can live with, or if they even manage to see it as their responsibility.

[Richard Marks]

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/photokina2006/Leica/IMG_0465.jpg

Richard I hope all this discussion of your camera does not seem too trivial. Replacing this casting is not a minor repair.

I really hope that Leica does not make this impossible for you, or that all of us have not taken your distress too lightly. I can only imagine how you must feel.

Please let us know (I am sure you will) if Leica is able to do this repair at a price you can live with, or if they even manage to see it as their responsibility.



Dear Frank
Many thanks for your kind words and concern. I believe its not a minor repair hence my thread title.
I have high hopes that this will be rectified under the Leica Passport Scheme as this specifies that it covers accidental damage. If all else fails I have insurance for all risks. I think I am now more interested in making others aware of this problem as for a number of us early adopters, we are pretty close to 1 years warranty and after this period repairs will be expensive. The LUF case was with a 135 2.8 telyt mounted, and in my case it was my 75 lux (also a pretty weighty lens). Ultimately I would like leica to make some due consideration both in terms of future designs and liability for this one.

Incidentally a shot from Mam Torr for your interest.

best wishes

Richard

52597

[Richard Marks]

Not off the camera anyway....I think I might have lost a bit of weight from it though. :eek:
You should be grateful it did not punch a hole in your boat!!

Richard

[chuckcars]

Well, you needed a backup M8 anyway! Now, go get one. :-)

[Richard Marks]

Well, you needed a backup M8 anyway! Now, go get one. :-)

Its called an M6

Richard

[Keith]

I noticed your coment about temperature ... with the wind chill factor who knows what the temeperature of the metal was ... very low I would suspect. Composite metals like these have increased brittleness when chilled.

You had no hope! :p

[Richard Marks]

I noticed your coment about temperature ... with the wind chill factor who knows what the temeperature of the metal was ... very low I would suspect. Composite metals like these have increased brittleness when chilled.

You had no hope! :p

Dear Keith

I think that it is common in accidents that a number of different factors all conspire and that it is the sum effect which does the damage. I think I was a little careless and a little unlucky. I have been very lucky over many years with camera gear and maybe yesterday my luck was up. I still harp back to the fact that all my other gear has never had a problem. Yashica FR, Nikon FM2 Nikon 90FX Nikon F100 Nikon D1X Hasselblad 503CW x2 Mamiya 7II Mamiya RZII 5x4 Leica MP Leica M6 Leica R8. I have worked in developing countries, travelled in Africa India China South America. Goodness knows how many knocks and bumps and dodgy baggage handling and all unscathed. I have had gear fall onto rocks, smash into any number of solid objects and it just makes the M8 seem a bit weedy by comparison. The only other mishap I can recall was a fracture of the connector of a Nikon SB28 Flashgun. They are actually designed to snap at the linkage with the hot shoe specifically to avoid tearing the hot shoe. An easy repair.

Incidentally in my day job as an anaesthetist, all our medical equipment has to pass a 'drop test''. It has to be able to hit the deck from 5 feet and still carry on working.

Best wishes


Richard

[waileong]

Hey, what's the passport warranty for, right?

[Richard Marks]

Hey, what's the passport warranty for, right?
Yes I guess that is partly what goes into the costs of an M8. I have spoken to Leica UK today and it is covered by the passport (fortunately). They are not sure whether its repair or replace until they get the camera.

Best wishes

Richard

[nikonhswebmaster]

Richard if there was ever better proof why it is crazy to buy an M8 without a passport warranty you have made the case. Without a passport warranty the camera would have to be VERY cheap for me to consider it.

You can say whatever you want about Leica, but the Passport Warranty is the best thing that any new Leica has going for it, and something no other company offers.

[Richard Marks]

Richard if there was ever better proof why it is crazy to buy an M8 without a passport warranty you have made the case. Without a passport warranty the camera would have to be VERY cheap for me to consider it.

You can say whatever you want about Leica, but the Passport Warranty is the best thing that any new Leica has going for it, and something no other company offers.

Indeed
Im just rather fortunate that it under 1 year old.
Older and wiser i guess!
Incidentally it looks like the chasis inside the M8 is made of plastic. if so it explains why the tripod bush does not insert into it. That could cause even worse mayhem.

Best wishes


Richard

[nikonhswebmaster]

The tripod socket would have to mount on a plate spanning between the two sides of the body casting.

BUT, I think everyone is expecting a bit much from tripod sockets. I do think the one on the M8 is especially weak, but they all have to be treated with great care.

If you knock over a camera and it survives you are very lucky.

[jaapv]

Dear Keith

I think that it is common in accidents that a number of different factors all conspire and that it is the sum effect which does the damage. I think I was a little careless and a little unlucky.

Richard

You are right there, Richard. Mine was in a far more heavy fall which flattened the baseplate (and knocked out the shutter, dislodged the sensor, bent the top cover and twisted a Summicron 35 asph) and the body was completely unmarked.

[ath]

I noticed your coment about temperature ... with the wind chill factor who knows what the temeperature of the metal was ... very low I would suspect. Composite metals like these have increased brittleness when chilled.

You had no hope! :p

The cause for wind chill is evaporating humidity thus cooling the surface even further. For this additional cooling you have to be either a human (or animal) or the material has to be wet. A dry M8 cannot be colder than the surronding air.

[Richard Marks]

Well my camera was sent to leica UK just over 1 week ago. Its current status is "in transit". Apparently transit resources are stretched at the moment as there are huge returns of Digilux 2's (a recognised fault) and this is causing delays.
I have every confidence that Leica will eventually fix things, but they are unable to give me any idea of time scale.

Richard

[StuartR]

I wouldn't expect it to be less than 3 months, given my experience with major repairs at Leica USA. If it takes less than 10 weeks, count yourself lucky.

[Richard Marks]

Well Stuart, I fear you may be right.
I have spoken to Leica UK this afternoon. They rather think my camera has not actually left the UK yet. Apparently in order to keep the costs down they need a full load before embarking.

I understand that in addition to the passport system, Leica are planning to introduce a tariff system for those jobs which are more urgent. It is currently being trialled in Germany but may be rolled out to the EU next year. This is interesting, but rather devalues the passport idea. I presumed that the cost of the passport was built into the price of the initial purchase. Personally i would be prepared to pay to get my camera sorted and if as things stand it really comes to 3 months it is a very considerable loss of use.

What do others think?

Richard

[rogue_designer]

I think it's hard to believe that Leica doesn't have an expedited pro service that makes sure people have cameras in their hands when they need them.

I've never had to wait two or three months for things to get sorted with any other manufacturer - and stories like this (whether exception or rule) don't do much for my faith in Leica's ability to support new camera systems.

I can't wait until Youxin can work on m8's ;)

[StuartR]

They do have an expedited pro service. You have to be a pro though. They want tear sheets.

[jaapv]

Well, a mate of mine aged 55 was foolish enough to take up (field, for North Americans :D) hockey again. He turned left, his right leg stayed put on the ground: one shattered hip and pelvis. Bad design? The moral being: if one applies a lever, forces get beyond engineering limits very easily. Had the baseplate held, you might well have ripped out your tripod screw.

[rogue_designer]

They do have an expedited pro service. You have to be a pro though. They want tear sheets.

Ah - well that's good then. I hadn't anything about it - but then I don't have much in the way of Leica equipment either.

[Richard Marks]

Well, a mate of mine aged 55 was foolish enough to take up (field, for North Americans :D) hockey again. He turned left, his right leg stayed put on the ground: one shattered hip and pelvis. Bad design? The moral being: if one applies a lever, forces get beyond engineering limits very easily. Had the baseplate held, you might well have ripped out your tripod screw.


Dear Jaaap

I am sorry to hear about your friend.

I do however think the base plate could be improved. (Just make it like the film M again would be a start. ) Why on earth was it altered?

Magnesium is particularly prone to metal fatigue and I would not mind betting in a year or two this might emerge as a real problem. There is a very thin strip of metal supporting all the weight. Jaap you are right about levers, but with the current design, having moved the tripod mount to the centre, there is a greater leverage excerted at the ends when rotational forces are applied to to the body relative to the base plate. The shape of the retaining slot is also an issue as the square is less strong mechanically than the previous circular one.

So we have a thin magnesium body, a base plate with a tiny thin retaining slot, weakened by its square shape, and an increase in the potential leverage on this weak point. As you say anything will break if sufficient leverage is applied. What i am saying is that the leverage about the retainer has been increased, whilst at the same time its strength has been reduced. This is the 'double whammy'.

Incidentally if the base plate had held and ripped out the tripod socket that would have been fine. All I would have to do is send for a new base plate. As things are, I need a new camera body as well.

Best wishes


Richard

[jaapv]

Don't get me wrong, Richard, I quite concur that the old design was more robust. And more elegant too, imo

[Richard Marks]

Dearest Jaap

I may have miss interpreted your post. The 'take home' i got was a kind of 'do not blame the equipment'. I dont blame my camera for its accidental trauma any more than I blame myself for letting go, or the wind for blowing at the wrong moment! But I can not stop harking back to the fact that I have never used a camera that is as flimsy as this one and its also the most money that I have ever spent. I was a bit careless and a bit unlucky in what happened, but this M8 compares unfavourably with all of my previous film cameras. (My Yashica FR bought for my 13th birthday 30 years ago still works fine and that has taken some serious punishment).

I am going to be using my M8 very differently when eventually I get it back. Its a wonderful machine, but I do not have confidence that it can take serious use and abuse. This will detract from my enjoyment to some extent. Leica have been very keen to max the "it does not just look like and M. IT IS an M " but its a somewhat more fragile version.

On a positive note its doing me good to spend a bit more time in my dark room.

Best wishes

Richard

[Richard Marks]

They do have an expedited pro service. You have to be a pro though. They want tear sheets.

There is no pro service from the UK.

Richard

[jaapv]

Dearest Jaap

I may have miss interpreted your post. The 'take home' i got was a kind of 'do not blame the equipment'. I dont blame my camera for its accidental trauma any more than I blame myself for letting go, or the wind for blowing at the wrong moment! But I can not stop harking back to the fact that I have never used a camera that is as flimsy as this one and its also the most money that I have ever spent. I was a bit careless and a bit unlucky in what happened, but this M8 compares unfavourably with all of my previous film cameras. (My Yashica FR bought for my 13th birthday 30 years ago still works fine and that has taken some serious punishment).

I am going to be using my M8 very differently when eventually I get it back. Its a wonderful machine, but I do not have confidence that it can take serious use and abuse. This will detract from my enjoyment to some extent. Leica have been very keen to max the "it does not just look like and M. IT IS an M " but its a somewhat more fragile version.

On a positive note its doing me good to spend a bit more time in my dark room.

Best wishes

Richard


No Richard, it was rather a "don't worry you were very unlucky and it is not typical"post. I broke the magnesium on an M4 by a 1 m fall and it stayed intact when my M8 fell six times as hard, go figure... - so really use the thing and just be careful with tripods. Tripods are not M-style, after all;)

Btw, I'm playing around with my M3 as well at the moment :)

[Richard Marks]

Dear JAAP

Many thanks
Im now working on the theory that it should not happen to me again!
I agree M's are not really tripod cameras. The reason for it was in order to fiddle with things in terms of ballancing land and sky. I generally expose 2 different RAW images and merge them later. If things are not in exaclty the same place it creates problems. I certainly have never needed a 'pod to avoid camera shake with an M. Maybe M's should not have a tripod mount! (and some say no flash gun mount either)

Best wishes


Richard

[Richard Marks]

Well just to report back my camera was not "a write off"
The lower half of the casing has been replaced and I suspect also the shutter and sensor.

I have to say allowing for the Christmas season, the turn around has been pretty impressive. The camera was sent on 6th december and arrived back yesterday.

The only documentation sent with it says it has been 'serviced / repaired' and the works have a 12 month warranty, although it does not say what has been done and therefore its a bit difficult to know what the warranty means. Slightly irritating but nice to get it back. At least the light was not that great over the last month any way!

Best wishes


Richard
54635

[Olsen]

Congratulations, Richard!

I think that we can all sigh with relief. It is good to know that we have bought a camera, - though expensive, that is truely supported by the producer; Leica.

[Richard Marks]

Many thanks Olsen!
Incidentally i should perhaps mention it was all done under the 'passport' scheme and did not cost me anything.
Yes Leica have delivered the goods and one has to accept that some of the high M8 price tag is actually funding the passport scheme in Europe.

Im still going to be very careful out there! It has also been very interesting using nothing but film for the last 6 weeks.

Best wishes


Richard

[Ben Z]

Yes Leica have delivered the goods and one has to accept that some of the high M8 price tag is actually funding the passport scheme in Europe.



That's harder for us Americans to accept because Leica-USA doesn't give us any Passport for our high-priced M8's :mad:

[StuartR]

Nevertheless, I have found that Leica USA is very good about not charging for repairs. I have had them fix things for free that were out of warranty, or do more than required during regular warranty service. For example, when I sent in my MP to clean the eyepiece, they did a full CLA on the camera at no charge. Of course, repairs can be quite expensive if the camera has something truly wrong with it and it is years out of warranty. Fixing the metering system in an R6 cost about 350 dollars.

[Richard Marks]

That's harder for us Americans to accept because Leica-USA doesn't give us any Passport for our high-priced M8's :mad:

Ben I agree.
Why is there no 'passport scheme' in the states? Is it some legal problem?

Richard

[Ben Z]

I doubt it Richard, because (at least at the time of the M8 introduction) they were still giving a 3-year Passport on MP, M7 and lenses. All I could do would be offer a wildly speculative (and cynical) opinion as to why there is no Passport on USA M8's, and I'd rather not do that.