61–70 of 123 posts
> 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…
> 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…
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…
The Sony mirrorless cameras used to have some third party "apps" that were pretty cool but apparently are now all discontinued. And what the Magic Lantern team did for Canon cameras (especially the 5DmkIII) was absolutely amazing. I still miss features to this day. If you are looking for a new camera also definitely checkout the new Panasonic Lumix line of full frame cameras - they are damn amazing. Extremely intuiti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I strongly suspect it's just easier from a customer support point of view, if you develop an application that causes the camera to overheat and fail. They really don't want to send you a new camera. The dangerous thing with code controlling hardware directly, is absent safe guards you can easily exceed the mechanical limits of the device. This is why seriously overclocking a CPU will definitely void the warranty, but…
But in this case, the camera processor still retains final control over the commands from the SDK. This isn't a customer firmware, just a networking interface that simulates pushing buttons and changing menus. The firmware has just as much ability to reject damaging commands as it would if the user was physically entering them.
This feels like cya, it probably won't break the camera, but just in case it does .
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…
I agree with you. This is a bit off topic, but I have a Sony a3000 and a6000. I have a non-sony USB camera timer/remote [1], and I'm pretty pleased with it. There seem to be similar products out there. If there is no USB SDK released by Sony, how are these manufacturers creating this USB control devices? Do they partner with camera vendors behind NDAs? Do they reverse engineer the protocol? Just curious. [1] https://…
In the case of USB type things, it's probably a bit easier to 'sniff' traffic and reverse engineer the protocol if one wants to. And while some MFGs are notorious for being 'protective' around their protocols (i.e. lenses) I think remote controls are likely not as much a bread and butter to them, so there's less incentive (especially without obsoleting a lot of existing kit.)
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…
However the flip side is, many global brands sponsor directly or indirectly university's around the world, and research is not cheap, if you saw the recent iphone lens exploded diagram a bit like this one https://wccftech.com/apple-working-new-iphone-camera/ you would see there is a lot of work going into all sorts of devices and the low hanging fruit from optics was harvested decades ago.
> 5.3 BEFORE SELLING, LICENSING, PROVIDING OR DISTRIBUTING THE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM TO YOUR CUSTOMER (IF ANY), YOU SHALL EXPLAIN AND MAKE SUCH CUSTOMER FULLY UNDERSTAND THE WARRANTY-EXCEPTION SET FORTH IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPH.
this is a b2b2c term -- we need better tech for capturing consent up the chain and for surfacing contract terms to downstream clients
(notwithstanding the fact that in this case, it's 65% bullshit that the warranty is voided and 110% bullshit that fuji expects downstream consent to be captured)
I, for one, can forgive FujiFilm... because, even though recently finally discontinued, they gave us FujiChrome Velvia 100 (& 50).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
In the meantime, everyone except professionals and image-quality obsessives has moved to phone cameras, for which Google and Apple have developed incredible software. It's been obvious for at least ten years that camera makers need to improve their software, and they've not done so, or very minimally done so.
Maybe they're working on something big, but Canon, et al. to me appear to be headed the way of Kodak, at least in the consumer market.
They would have a hard enough time with casual users just because the camera on their phone is "free" (included in the price and perhaps more importantly, the form factor). But I don't even see any attempt to compete with Apple or Android cameras.
I use a full-frame SLR, and love my lenses. But I put it at even money whether I will ever buy another.
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…
Because why give something out for free when you can offer that stuff only in the most expensive models?
If you look at http://www.gphoto.org/proj/libgphoto2/support.php http://digicamcontrol.com/cameras its almost universally older stuff and hiend models. At some point they stopped exposing control in order to upsell.