dj_may

<p>Everyone has preferences. Mine are Tmax 100 and Tmax 400 developed in Rodinal 1:100. I use Tmax 100 almost all the time except if I need an exposure time faster that 1/2 or 1/4 second. You must be careful not to underexpose. If you do not underexpose, the films can be very forgiving.</p>

<p>Well at least they are only upside down. Mine are backwards too.</p>

<p>Leica could consider, if they already have not, an upgradable camera. With the durable camera body, it would be reasonable that the electronics package and sensor could be replaced. If Leica thinks that people will replace cameras rather than upgrade, then they would not do it.</p>

<p>Raid Amin, I will not get an upgrade because my sensor does not show the defect yet. I will have to wait until the defect shows up. I would prefer to upgrade before the defect shows, which it probably will, because then I will lose images and time. I am not happy with the Leica position on this. There is a known defect in the glass, and in time all sensors will show the defect.<br> For anyone who has the defect showing, they can request a price for upgrade to M Type 240. The news release said the price will be based on the condition of the camera with the defect.</p>

<p>Raid Amin, I suppose the upgrade question is addressed to me? Yes, the upgrade option is for upgrading to M from M9, not a sensor replacement. Leica will propose a price to upgrade, if requested. It is only available to those who have the defect already showing itself.</p>

<p>I wrote the Leica service department to clarify if the upgrade option was available <strong>before</strong> the sensor defect showed. I do not want to wait for a defect, but would upgrade now. The reply is that the upgrade option is only available for cameras where the defects are showing.<br> I am not happy knowing I have an expensive product with a known defect. I no longer purchase Ford or GM products because of that kind of experience.<br> Despite the deficiencies that have been noted frequently, I have been happy with the performance of the M9. I adapted to the deficiencies, but I do not know how to adapt to a defect.</p>

<p>I no longer use N+- development. I use compensating development and expose for shadows/darkest areas in zone 3. That along with split contrast printing enables me to accomplish just about everything I did with N+- development. I should add that it took a lot of testing to find the right development to cover a variety of dynamic range scenes. In the end it is much simpler, and I prefer simplicity.</p>