What some people are missing is what I tried to clear up with my addendum yeasterday. For those that havn't seen it yet I'll put it here now...
Why did I agree to Leica's request not to publish some of the problems that I saw during my testing?
Of the 500 odd photographs I took during about a week of testing I only saw the magenta cast issue in 2 images and the green blob issue in 1 image. That's well under 1% of the shots take.
I was therefore loath to mention the problems because I felt that they might have been anomalies that others might not encounter, and I didn't have the benefit then of the hindsight in now knowing the nature of the problem. I did identify the low light level white balance issue and also the excessive IR sensitivity and discussed them in the review.
Asking a manufacturer for feedback on a review, particularly with regard to potential factual errors is the norm. Most reputable reviewers do this as a matter of course.
Leica appropriately asked me to hold off on some of the problems that I saw, because, I believed, they wanted to identify whether these were anomalies or systemic. A fair request. I gave them the benefit of the doubt.
In any event, my enthusiasm for the M8 is undiminished and I did end up purchasing one for myself, even knowing what I did. So anyone that feels I deceived them has to accept that I did so without mal intent, since I put my own money where my pen is.
My judgement call at the time was that three problem images was not enough to delay the review. My sending the review to Leica beforehand is the normal thing to do. I was not asking for permission, I was seeking their feedback on factual errors. I do this with all manufacturers as a matter of courtesy.
Leica's request to hold off mentioning the problem images also seemed reasonable on their part because it wasn't clear if these were, as I wrote, anomolies or systemic.
The problem now for Leica, and for me, is that they didn't get back to me, and that they subsequently issued public statements elsewhere, thus effectively blindsiding me. We are now both suffering for this. To be charitable, I can only assume that they did this unintentionally, though I must say that I still havn't heard a word from them on the topic.
As I just wrote in another thread, I wish that I had stated in the initial review that I'd seen a handful of images with problems, that I'd brought them to Leica's attention, and that I was waiting for their analysis. But that in the meantime I was not holding up the rest of the review.
But I didn't, and I accept responsability for the consequences.
Michael
