Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

fujifilm-x.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#41

Post by Zak »

Manuel_D wrote: post #28
hexo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not valid. At all. I think it is illegal in some countries and should be illegal everywhere. It was enough of these "practices".

If I swap out my car's engine with a more powerful one and screw up the drivetrain will warranty cover it? If I load broken firmware onto my device that screws it up, why should the company be on the hook? Replacing firmware is no different than replacing any other component. What countries force companies to provide warranty when users load faulty firmware onto devices?

In the US, car manufacturers are required to honor the warranty for the rest of the car after you swap the engine unless they can prove your engine swap caused the failure they don't want to repair. They will probably have little difficulty proving that for a scenario like a more powerful engine breaking a transmission. They'd have a much harder time claiming it caused the heated seats to stop working.

This SDK seems to be for PC-based remote control apps, not camera firmware. A well-designed camera firmware would not accept remote control commands that exceed the hardware's safety limits.

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#42

Post by ska »

ciprian_craciun wrote: post #26
ska wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am an amateur photographer, and I can't understand why the major camera brands (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc.) aren't open ... How much are you willing to pay for this? I suspect they've all looked at it, and decided the ROI wasn't worth it.

Well, the camera is already ~1.5-2K EUR (without lens), thus I think the price already covers it... But if I must put a price on it, I would say ~100-200 EUR, but then it should come with at least 5 years of updates, and it should work on Linux. :) Also, just supporting some basic features, like shutter and all the exposure settings, shouldn't be that hard... I bet all of these are already implemented, because many c…

> Which, although might end up being quite a non trivial amount, i

Right. Engineers usually underestimate how much this really is. Often by an order of magnitude or two.

I'm pretty confident their margins aren't fat enough they'd be happy considering eating 1-2% (i.e. your numbers) on something that might help a fraction of install base. Hell they may already not be making next to nothing on these bodies.

So it would be a real project, and it would cost them enough that (using your rough numbers) they'd need to sell probably a few thousand support contracts a year to justify doing it properly (supporting multiple cameras, customer support, testing etc.). So I imagine if they have looked at it, they've balanced that against the "brand building" as you put it, and aren't sure it's a net win.

The prosumer space is funny for stuff like this, as people are often quite capable but not really willing to pay enough to justify the cost of real support. Some companies solve this by throwing something unsupported/unofficial over the wall, others (or their lawyers) decide the whole thing isn't worth the hassle.

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#44

Post by ska »

pdpi wrote: post #29
ska wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am an amateur photographer, and I can't understand why the major camera brands (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc.) aren't open ... How much are you willing to pay for this? I suspect they've all looked at it, and decided the ROI wasn't worth it.

I'm not sure they have looked at it, and I'm not sure they'd even examine this from an ROI point of view. Camera makers (even camera divisions in more "high-tech" companies like Sony) are very much traditional hardware-first companies, I'm fairly certain he idea of opening up the cameras is just alien to them.

That's fair, it may be a blind spot. But even if it weren't, it's not clear it's would be a net win for them.

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#45

Post by judge2020 »

e2le wrote: post #12
AlexandrB wrote: post #2

> 5.2 YOU AGREE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, ONCE A PRODUCT IS USED OR CONTROLLED BY OR THROUGH THE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM, SUCH PRODUCT SHALL BE OUT OF SUCH MANUFACTURER-WARRANTY WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCT AS SEPARATELY SPECIFIED BY FUJIFILM, FUJIFILM’S AFFILIATES, OR THEIR BUSINESS PARTNERS. Brutal. Consumer protections are lagging badly behind in the software era. It's bad enough that commercial software has broad discl…

Is that even legal? It seems similar to the "warranty void" stickers which are nothing more than an illegal scare tactic that many individuals are conned into believing. https://www.ifixit.com/News/11748/warranty-stickers-are-ille... https://www.ifixit.com/News/15464/warranty-voiding-stickers-...

Even if it's illegal it doesn't override user protection laws, so the statement has no effect and they'd need to prove your SDK usage caused an issue with the product to legally deny warranty.

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#46

Post by tomaskafka »

DannyBee wrote: post #38
AlexandrB wrote: post #2

> 5.2 YOU AGREE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, ONCE A PRODUCT IS USED OR CONTROLLED BY OR THROUGH THE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM, SUCH PRODUCT SHALL BE OUT OF SUCH MANUFACTURER-WARRANTY WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCT AS SEPARATELY SPECIFIED BY FUJIFILM, FUJIFILM’S AFFILIATES, OR THEIR BUSINESS PARTNERS. Brutal. Consumer protections are lagging badly behind in the software era. It's bad enough that commercial software has broad discl…

Even in consumer places like the US, this is generally illegal. They would not be able to refuse warranty service without showing that your use of the SDK was the reason the camera failed (and the burden would be on them). IE they can't say "Yes, the lens popped out because it was defective, but you used the SDK so tough crap"

Funnily I had exactly this happen with HTC One - yes, your phone camera has degraded inside a warranty period and all photos have purple fade, but since you unlocked the bootloader, you're out of luck, bye.

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#47

Post by judge2020 »

oh_sigh wrote: post #15
noasaservice wrote: post #3

The text (at bottom, outside of the block): "AS STARTED ABOVE, USING THIS SDK TO CONNECT TO OR CONTROL, ANY COMPATIBLE FUJIFILM CAMERA WILL VOID THE CAMERA’S LIMITED PRODUCT WARRANTY." I'm sure the FTC would like to have a word, about revoking a warranty by using intended software.

In fact, the Magnusson-Moss act makes it illegal to void a warranty even for 3rd party, aftermarket modifications to a product, unless it can be shown that the aftermarket modification is the cause of or contributed to the warranty claim. So even if you had some random black box that you plugged into your cameras USB port, and it would send all sorts of wild commands to the camera, that would not void your warranty u…

The thing is, if the image sensor overheats with this supposed camera stresser, how would they prove it? Do they start to keep tons of logs about API usage and deny a warranty claim if that log has been wiped?

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#48

Post by ISL »

ciprian_craciun wrote: post #11

I am an amateur photographer, and I can't understand why the major camera brands (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc.) aren't open at least to the concept of SDK's to control their cameras (let alone opening the lens mount specifications)... It would make their cameras much more flexible and useful, thus perhaps gaining some users that currently use smartphones where it seems there is greater control over and integration…

For the bigger players, they miss out on market segmentation. An EOS M with Magic Lantern has a number of features that are featured on Canon's cinema line, for example. The M is perhaps no longer competitive in key ways, but had ML been available with today's level of polish in 2012, it would have eaten into higher-margin products.

Fuji is perhaps best poised to enable open development -- their pricing structure is more around hardware variations on a common sensor/processing than strict differentiation in capability.

The far future of camera development probably does look like open-source (or, at a minimum, common-versioned closed-source) software/firmware riding on commercially-manufactured hardware platforms (just like computers today). We're not there yet, but the technical success of Magic Lantern shows that the door is open.

A dark-horse entrant like Sigma could, in addition to Fuji, be a hardware vendor that could crack open a "commoditize your competition" market.

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#49

Post by buildbot »

muhehe wrote: post #30
ceeg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wouldnt shutter control give the possibility of the image sensor overheating from extended exposures? I could absolutely be talking out of my ass but I thought I remembered that being a risk when I flashed ML to my Canon for star photos.

Basically every camera I have had has a "bulb", which is pretty much as-long-as-you-want exposure. Never heard of sensor overheating even after hours of exposure.

Any CCD based camera will certainly heat up a lot, and cmos as well to a lesser degree without good/active cooling.

Most cameras time out at about an hour maximum unless they are special purpose astro cameras.

Re: Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

#50

Post by dylan604 »

ceeg wrote: post #23
opencl wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SDK basically gives remote shutter control and file transfer. There is nothing in it that could plausibly damage anything.

wouldnt shutter control give the possibility of the image sensor overheating from extended exposures? I could absolutely be talking out of my ass but I thought I remembered that being a risk when I flashed ML to my Canon for star photos.

The worst I can thing of is extra noise from the heat build up from the sensor being energized for extended period. This is one of the many reasons that image stacking is so advantageous. Cold winter nights imaging Orion is probably not going to notice it nearly as much as those hot summer nights trying to image Milky Way. (I'm hoping to take my camera cooler out for a spin this summer. Just a modified pelican case with insulation and ice chest freezer packs. lo-tech)
Post reply on HN