12 ms·

Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

178 points by dennisvennink 5y ago

Proven 5y ago
What's strange about that? It's no different from losing support entitlement if you screw around with a phone SDK and brick your phone. But another camera if you don't like it.
AlexandrB 5y ago
> 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 disclaimers against ensuring any kind of functionality, but this stuff is starting to creep into hardware too. I think right-to-repair is a good start.
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  I think it's totally valid to void warranty when customers modify product software. If users do things like disable temperature limits and mess up their camera, then I see no reason why the company (and be extension, other customers) should foot the bill. Giving away the SDK, regardless of warranty revocation, is a step ahead of most camera manufacturers.
  - hexo 5y ago
    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".
    - rosndo 5y ago
      Not illegal, just not binding.
    - Manuel_D 5y ago
      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?
      - MrStonedOne 5y ago
        > If I swap out my car's engine with a more powerful one yes, legally required to be covered in the us. > and screw up the drivetrain will warranty cover it? No, not legally required to be covered in the us. The difference is the law specifies the manufacturer can not assume a leads to b, they have to a reason to think b was caused by a.
      - cge 5y ago
        That's not the problem. The problem here is that Fuji appears to be claiming that any use of the SDK voids the warranty entirely, regardless of the defect. t would be like if you swapped out your car's engine with a more powerful one, and then, from a completely unrelated fault, its navigation system stops working. In the US, my understanding is that this is explicitly not legal, per the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. FujiFilm can choose not to offer a warranty at all, but if they offer one, then it must cover defects on modified devices unless they can show that the modification caused or contributed to the defect. In the EU, it is my understanding that it is legal to have a guarantee with terms like these. However, regardless of any guarantee the manufacturer may offer, there is a statutory guarantee in the EU for most products, which completely ignores the terms that the manufacturer might prefer. This usually ends up being weaker than Magnuson–Moss in terms of duration and modifications. But it usually means that for six months, the seller must prove that the fault with the product was caused by the consumer, and for two years, if you can show that the problem is from a defect with the device originally and not from you, then you can still get repairs, replacement, or a refund.
      - DannyBee 5y ago
        The short answer is: The warranty must cover damage not caused by your modification. There are no countries i'm aware of that require you warranty damage caused by user modification. Lots of countries require that you do not void the entire warranty, or refuse service, of any damage not caused by the modification, and generally the manufacturer has to show the damage was caused by the modification if they want to refuse service. In this case, Fuji is trying to void the entire warranty. That is not legal in a lot of countries.
  - opencl 5y ago
    The SDK basically gives remote shutter control and file transfer. There is nothing in it that could plausibly damage anything.
    - judge2020 5y ago
      There are a lot of changeable settings listed in those header files, chances are some combination of settings or other highly-tuned SDK usage could put the camera to work and potentially cause it to overheat (eg. forcing a specific shutter speed while also capping the movie shutter speed, perhaps) since they're not testing the use cases you could theoretically enable via the SDK.
      - deathanatos 5y ago
        Then that's a defect in the product, not the fault of the user, and should be covered under warranty. (& the defect should get fixed. Nobody wants to brick their camera.)
    - ceeg 5y ago
      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.
      - muhehe 5y ago
        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.
        Manuel_D 5y ago
        Overheating is more of an issue for the image processor, at high frame rates. During bulb mode, the sensor is on for a long time but it's only one frame being handled by the image processor.
  - jchw 5y ago
    Hardware should be designed to be resilient to broken software to whatever degree possible. And then still, warranty should cover defects in the face of modified software. The SDK is not some hack downloaded from some shady website. It’s not a third-party unauthorized tool. This isn’t like, “I transformed my Tesla into an ICE car and then asked them to fix it.” It’s like, “I paired my phone via Bluetooth to the entertainment system and now they won’t fix my defective AC.” Yes it’s hard to prove that hardware wasn’t broken by broken, unauthorized software modifications. Is there even a small amount of evidence that the warranty burden caused by software modifications is significant? Many stores are happy to cover occasional consumer error even if they’re not actually liable to, and that is SURELY more common than firmware modifications. Not to mention the directions this could go into. Oh, malware exploited our phones and then modified the system firmware? Sorry, your warranty is void because you ran unofficial firmware, goodbye. (Obviously, and especially in the last case, if you do break your device on your own, or someone else does, then of course manufacturer warranties do not cover that. That’s a whole different wheelhouse. But your warranty should not be entirely void over software. This is the same as those technically-not-legally-binding “warranty void if removed” stickers everyone unfortunately tolerates.)
- e2le 5y ago
  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-illegal https://www.ifixit.com/News/11748/warranty-stickers-are-ille... https://www.ifixit.com/News/15464/warranty-voiding-stickers-are-illegal-but-these-companies-are-still-using-them https://www.ifixit.com/News/15464/warranty-voiding-stickers-...
  - judge2020 5y ago
    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.
  - kahrl 5y ago
    It's not just a scare tactic, it's how these companies operate. They will illegally refuse to service products they have an obligation to. Until there are massive class action lawsuits, this isn't changing.
  - kotaKat 5y ago
    The contract is under Japanese jurisdiction. Does anyone here know Japanese law in regards to something like this?
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      No, I don’t think that’s how that works. Your contracts with your customers is under the jurisdiction of where your customers live, not where your company is headquartered. It would be way too easy to side step any law they wished that way. Plus, must camera manufacturers sell through an american subsidiary. I know thats how Canon works.
- cosmotic 5y ago
  Regardless of their written policy or silly warranty void stickers, the law dictates the warranty still covers all components not modified or damaged by the consumer. You might have to fight in court, but thats the law.
- DannyBee 5y ago
  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"
  - tomaskafka 5y ago
    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.
    - DannyBee 5y ago
      I've had good luck without having to resort to legal process. But some companies are recalcitrant about it.
- jug 5y ago
  Good luck enforcing this in an EU court lol
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
noasaservice 5y ago
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.
- justin_oaks 5y ago
  Exactly, this part of the agreement may not void the warranty. Just like stickers on the outside of a product that say "Warranty void if broken" don't void the warranty. In fact, those stickers themselves are illegal: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/11/601582169/warranty-void-if-removed-as-it-turns-out-feds-say-those-warnings-are-illegal https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/11/601582169...
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  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 unless the black box was actually responsible for the damage to the camera.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    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?
ISL 5y ago
Kind of surprising to see Fujifilm do this. On the flip side, it suggests that there are probably some interesting things that are possible with the SDK.
- spaetzleesser 5y ago
  Not so sure about that. I bet it was just some lawyers adding the clause.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    Here are the header files for the main api (i imagine) and the X-S10[0]. There's a lot of stuff you can do in there. 0: https://gist.github.com/judge2020/6ed181c1367979333baec9484e3c5d69 https://gist.github.com/judge2020/6ed181c1367979333baec9484e...
Rucadi 5y ago
I suppose they have to demonstrate that the error you get derived from the use of the SDK.
spaetzleesser 5y ago
Camera manufacturers really seem to try to shoot themselves in the foot as much as possible. They are putting on something interesting and immediately kill it for braid use. Nobody is going to publish software based on the SDK. At least nobody who doesn’t want the threat of lawsuits hanging over them.
ciprian_craciun 5y ago
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 with the cameras. On the other side, if one can implement in software what the producer doesn't want to implement in firmware, they might miss some future upgrade sales... I am currently thinking on buying a FujiFilm X-T4, and I was pleased to see there is a SDK, but now, finding out that using the SDK is practically forbidden (until the warranty ends), it makes me stop and think about my decision... What could the SDK do to the camera so that it voids the warranty? (On the other hand, given the quality of camera brand produced software, I can imagine the quality of the code that went into it...) :)
- daveslash 5y ago
  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://www.amazon.com/Remote-Control-Wireless-Shutter-Release/dp/B07T21VN84/ https://www.amazon.com/Remote-Control-Wireless-Shutter-Relea...
  - to11mtm 5y ago
    Not sure, but wanted to toss out there's apparently a github project that does USB Control for at least some Alphas. [0]. 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.) [0] - https://github.com/pixeltris/SonyAlphaUSB https://github.com/pixeltris/SonyAlphaUSB
- 5y ago
hexo 5y ago
That's certainly illegal here.
EMIRELADERO 5y ago
> Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Fujifilm hereby grants to you a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and royalty-free license to; (a) use, modify and make a limited number of copies of the SDK solely for the purpose of the Development; Later in the same agreement... > 3.5 You shall not (and shall not permit others), to reverse engineer, reverse compile, or disassemble the SDK in any way(in whole or in part); and you shall not (and shall not permit others) to use any method to trace, decompile, or disassemble the SDK. So, which one is it?
- detaro 5y ago
  You can do all modifications that do not involve things banned in the second quote?
  - EMIRELADERO 5y ago
    And what would those entail? How could one modify an SDK without disassembling or even debugging?
    - gambiting 5y ago
      An SDK typically isn't a binary blob - it's usually a collection of header files you can integrate into your projects, media assets, config files etc. All of those can by modified by hand without disassembling anything.
      - EMIRELADERO 5y ago
        That is true. It would be interesting to see this played out in court. When there are doubts around a certain clause on a contract of adhesion/license with non-negotiable terms, courts tend to side with the interpretation most favorable to the consumer.
    - detaro 5y ago
      Even just adapting examples or build scripts would be "modification", that was the kind of thing I was thinking of first.
Maursault 5y ago
I, for one, can forgive FujiFilm... because, even though recently finally discontinued, they gave us FujiChrome Velvia 100 (& 50).
- gmiller123456 5y ago
  My jaw hit the floor for a second. They appear to have only discontinued the sheet versions of Velvia 50, and still make 35mm and 120.
  - Maursault 5y ago
    Condolences. https://fujiaddict.com/2021/07/06/fujichrome-velvia-100-discontinued-today-and-banned-for-sale-in-the-us-starting-september-5-2021/ https://fujiaddict.com/2021/07/06/fujichrome-velvia-100-disc...
    - gmiller123456 5y ago
      That's for Velvia 100, Velvia 50 is still available. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/512063-USA/Fujifilm_15757464_RVP_135_36_Fujichrome_Velvia.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/512063-USA/Fujifilm_1...
- astrange 5y ago
  They also make medium format mirrorless cameras, which are a great way to feel superior to all the people who think "DSLR" is what you call a high-end digital camera. I can't quite bring myself to spend the money to get a GFX 100S though.
  - anta40 5y ago
    The price for 2nd hand GFX 50S or 50R is very tempting. For enthusiasts like me who rarely make huge prints and mostly only post on social medias, 50 MP is waayyy more than enough :D
    - 5y ago
themerone 5y ago
This is illegal in the US due to the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. They can only void the warrenty if they can prove that the damage is the result of the SDK usage.
awinter-py 5y ago
also interesting is the following clause > 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)
- ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
  Of course it isn't good that the warranty is being voided, but as a matter of contract this particular clause seems very logical. For the consumer it is good to know when you are being provided a third-party service/app that could void a warranty, and a clause like this makes the third-party provider liable for non-disclosure of the risks.
  - awinter-py 5y ago
    but they're not being provided a 3rd-party app that voids a warranty they're getting a 1st party app that (if you think this contract is enforceable) voids the warranty in practice, this whole page of products https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/software https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/software probably (I'm guessing) uses the sdk, is probably advertised as part of the product's value, and doesn't say anything about warranty if fuji finds out you used the camera with photoshop, then uses that to reject a subsequent repair (related or unrelated to sdk), this seems like a reasonable case for false advertising and a refund
TheMagicHorsey 5y ago
I have a Fujifilm XPro3. My favorite camera of all time. But I would trade it in for a camera with equivalent specs that runs a proper operating system and supports app development. Cameras are so far behind smartphones in terms of their software that it has become embarrassing. Paying $2000+ for a camera, only to find out your smartphone does a better job of autofocusing and handling noise is just annoying.
daleharvey 5y ago
This SDK only works on the top end Fuji's, the cheapest one supported starts at £850 (body only) Fuji has famously terrible app support, its a nightmare to set up and cuts out constantly, transferring images over wifi is slow and unreliable to the point of it being useless, the remote shutter is unreliable and doesnt have any of the extremely simple to program features that intervalometer's have. You can't shoot tethered unless you have one of the above very expensive cameras. The whole software ecosystem around cameras is awful, I would love to see some open source community initiatives to be able to control these cameras and extend their functionality but I haven't seen much of that in the photography community.
- HNHatesUsers 5y ago
  The lack of an intervalometer in ANY camera today is an insufferable insult. Not to mention that the assertion in the title of this post is wrong, at least in the USA. We have a federal law called the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act that makes it illegal to void the warranty of a product simply because the user modified it. Canon cameras have enjoyed some fairly active open-source/hacker support. Check out Magic Lantern and CHDK (I can't tell if that one's still maintained).
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  I haven’t tried Magic Lantern yet, but I have been reasonably happy with Canon’s remote app. It has been reliable so far, with the only downside being that it doesn’t offer GPS tagging for my camera (EOS 80D)
- KolenCh 5y ago
  First sentence incorrect. £850 is not top end. A typical high end camera product would starts at $2000, and nowadays more often than not is $3000+. A quick search shows the top end of Fuji X mount is $2000+. And that’s not even the top end of Fuji’s, which goes to the medium format GFX mount. For your other points, I know you’re talking about app, but Fiji has been famous about their software support in terms of how long they continue to update their firmware. They even market it Kaizen. And it is an objective truth that you can verify by comparing to how often other brands upgrade their firmware (Sony is not bad but still not as good.) There exists open source softwares on camera, just may be not Fuji (I don’t know.) If you want open source softwares running on camera which significantly increases its capability, try Canon’s. That one is the most mature.
kejaed 5y ago
https://cascable.se/ios/ https://cascable.se/ios/ For those looking to use something in between some of the horrible official camera apps and implementing something with this SDK, Cascable is really quite nice. I find it well worth the subscription. Before the official SDK came out, I tried using this project that was working on reverse engineering the protocol for Fuji cameras: https://github.com/hkr/fuji-cam-wifi-tool https://github.com/hkr/fuji-cam-wifi-tool Alas, I’m working with an X-T2 and it is not supported by the official SDK.
traviszhong 5y ago
Some android phones unlock bootloader also voids warranty.
t0bia_s 5y ago
It would be great to have on Fuji cameras something like Magic Lantern on Canon's. Technically camera HW is capable of much more than manufacturer allow to do with software. They usually support cameras with updates for 2 years and and then nothing. I understand that it is more profitable to make new cameras but it is not sustainable and eventually all consumer camera manufacturer will have to change their approach, because this industry slowly dying in consumer area. And it is not necessary because of smartphones but also because cameras since circa 2014 are good enough to keep them until die, not to switch every year. I'm using Fuji cameras for pro work over 5 years now and I still mostly use X-T2 and x100F. Those are most reliable cameras I have. Very solid construction, "made in Japan". X-T3 feels very plasticky. Same for X-T4.
cfn 5y ago
I have an XE 4 and I also investigated the possibility but they don't even provide headers for all the models. I would have to buy one of the few supported models to be able to play with the SDK. They are missing a big oportunity and whoever wakes up first may get a nice boost from computational photography afficionados as well as many specialized fields. I understand that they are trying to save development time by not building the necessary safeguards and I wish they published some less invasive way to communicate with the cameras such as over bluetooth or Wifi which many cameras already support.
m000 5y ago
An interesting question here is: How would they know that you used the SDK? Does the camera have non-volatile memory for saving that piece of info? Assuming that it does, how can they make that bit tamper-proof? Not that tamper-proofing is undoable, but it would require a lot of expensive engineering, just to save them from replacing a few dozens of cameras that presumably may break because of incorrect use of the SDK.
- Goz3rr 5y ago
  I have no idea what the exact hardware inside of the camera is, but almost every microcontroller has something like eFuses or one time programmable memory in this day and age. Not a lot of expensive engineering required, just a few hours of software development for the camera firmware and SDK developers. It'll be good enough for most warranty cases you can now hand wave away.

178 points by dennisvennink 5y ago

What's strange about that? It's no different from losing support entitlement if you screw around with a phone SDK and brick your phone. But another camera if you don't like it.

AlexandrB 5y ago

> 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 disclaimers against ensuring any kind of functionality, but this stuff is starting to creep into hardware too. I think right-to-repair is a good start.

Manuel_D 5y ago
I think it's totally valid to void warranty when customers modify product software. If users do things like disable temperature limits and mess up their camera, then I see no reason why the company (and be extension, other customers) should foot the bill. Giving away the SDK, regardless of warranty revocation, is a step ahead of most camera manufacturers.
- hexo 5y ago
  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".
  - rosndo 5y ago
    Not illegal, just not binding.
  - Manuel_D 5y ago
    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?
    - MrStonedOne 5y ago
      > If I swap out my car's engine with a more powerful one yes, legally required to be covered in the us. > and screw up the drivetrain will warranty cover it? No, not legally required to be covered in the us. The difference is the law specifies the manufacturer can not assume a leads to b, they have to a reason to think b was caused by a.
    - cge 5y ago
      That's not the problem. The problem here is that Fuji appears to be claiming that any use of the SDK voids the warranty entirely, regardless of the defect. t would be like if you swapped out your car's engine with a more powerful one, and then, from a completely unrelated fault, its navigation system stops working. In the US, my understanding is that this is explicitly not legal, per the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. FujiFilm can choose not to offer a warranty at all, but if they offer one, then it must cover defects on modified devices unless they can show that the modification caused or contributed to the defect. In the EU, it is my understanding that it is legal to have a guarantee with terms like these. However, regardless of any guarantee the manufacturer may offer, there is a statutory guarantee in the EU for most products, which completely ignores the terms that the manufacturer might prefer. This usually ends up being weaker than Magnuson–Moss in terms of duration and modifications. But it usually means that for six months, the seller must prove that the fault with the product was caused by the consumer, and for two years, if you can show that the problem is from a defect with the device originally and not from you, then you can still get repairs, replacement, or a refund.
    - DannyBee 5y ago
      The short answer is: The warranty must cover damage not caused by your modification. There are no countries i'm aware of that require you warranty damage caused by user modification. Lots of countries require that you do not void the entire warranty, or refuse service, of any damage not caused by the modification, and generally the manufacturer has to show the damage was caused by the modification if they want to refuse service. In this case, Fuji is trying to void the entire warranty. That is not legal in a lot of countries.
- opencl 5y ago
  The SDK basically gives remote shutter control and file transfer. There is nothing in it that could plausibly damage anything.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    There are a lot of changeable settings listed in those header files, chances are some combination of settings or other highly-tuned SDK usage could put the camera to work and potentially cause it to overheat (eg. forcing a specific shutter speed while also capping the movie shutter speed, perhaps) since they're not testing the use cases you could theoretically enable via the SDK.
    - deathanatos 5y ago
      Then that's a defect in the product, not the fault of the user, and should be covered under warranty. (& the defect should get fixed. Nobody wants to brick their camera.)
  - ceeg 5y ago
    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.
    - muhehe 5y ago
      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.
      - Manuel_D 5y ago
        Overheating is more of an issue for the image processor, at high frame rates. During bulb mode, the sensor is on for a long time but it's only one frame being handled by the image processor.
- jchw 5y ago
  Hardware should be designed to be resilient to broken software to whatever degree possible. And then still, warranty should cover defects in the face of modified software. The SDK is not some hack downloaded from some shady website. It’s not a third-party unauthorized tool. This isn’t like, “I transformed my Tesla into an ICE car and then asked them to fix it.” It’s like, “I paired my phone via Bluetooth to the entertainment system and now they won’t fix my defective AC.” Yes it’s hard to prove that hardware wasn’t broken by broken, unauthorized software modifications. Is there even a small amount of evidence that the warranty burden caused by software modifications is significant? Many stores are happy to cover occasional consumer error even if they’re not actually liable to, and that is SURELY more common than firmware modifications. Not to mention the directions this could go into. Oh, malware exploited our phones and then modified the system firmware? Sorry, your warranty is void because you ran unofficial firmware, goodbye. (Obviously, and especially in the last case, if you do break your device on your own, or someone else does, then of course manufacturer warranties do not cover that. That’s a whole different wheelhouse. But your warranty should not be entirely void over software. This is the same as those technically-not-legally-binding “warranty void if removed” stickers everyone unfortunately tolerates.)
e2le 5y ago
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-illegal https://www.ifixit.com/News/11748/warranty-stickers-are-ille... https://www.ifixit.com/News/15464/warranty-voiding-stickers-are-illegal-but-these-companies-are-still-using-them https://www.ifixit.com/News/15464/warranty-voiding-stickers-...
- judge2020 5y ago
  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.
- kahrl 5y ago
  It's not just a scare tactic, it's how these companies operate. They will illegally refuse to service products they have an obligation to. Until there are massive class action lawsuits, this isn't changing.
- kotaKat 5y ago
  The contract is under Japanese jurisdiction. Does anyone here know Japanese law in regards to something like this?
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    No, I don’t think that’s how that works. Your contracts with your customers is under the jurisdiction of where your customers live, not where your company is headquartered. It would be way too easy to side step any law they wished that way. Plus, must camera manufacturers sell through an american subsidiary. I know thats how Canon works.
cosmotic 5y ago
Regardless of their written policy or silly warranty void stickers, the law dictates the warranty still covers all components not modified or damaged by the consumer. You might have to fight in court, but thats the law.
DannyBee 5y ago
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"
- tomaskafka 5y ago
  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.
  - DannyBee 5y ago
    I've had good luck without having to resort to legal process. But some companies are recalcitrant about it.
jug 5y ago
Good luck enforcing this in an EU court lol
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

noasaservice 5y ago

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.

justin_oaks 5y ago
Exactly, this part of the agreement may not void the warranty. Just like stickers on the outside of a product that say "Warranty void if broken" don't void the warranty. In fact, those stickers themselves are illegal: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/11/601582169/warranty-void-if-removed-as-it-turns-out-feds-say-those-warnings-are-illegal https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/11/601582169...
oh_sigh 5y ago
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 unless the black box was actually responsible for the damage to the camera.
- judge2020 5y ago
  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?

ISL 5y ago

Kind of surprising to see Fujifilm do this. On the flip side, it suggests that there are probably some interesting things that are possible with the SDK.

spaetzleesser 5y ago
Not so sure about that. I bet it was just some lawyers adding the clause.
- judge2020 5y ago
  Here are the header files for the main api (i imagine) and the X-S10[0]. There's a lot of stuff you can do in there. 0: https://gist.github.com/judge2020/6ed181c1367979333baec9484e3c5d69 https://gist.github.com/judge2020/6ed181c1367979333baec9484e...

Rucadi 5y ago

I suppose they have to demonstrate that the error you get derived from the use of the SDK.

spaetzleesser 5y ago

Camera manufacturers really seem to try to shoot themselves in the foot as much as possible. They are putting on something interesting and immediately kill it for braid use. Nobody is going to publish software based on the SDK. At least nobody who doesn’t want the threat of lawsuits hanging over them.

ciprian_craciun 5y ago

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 with the cameras. On the other side, if one can implement in software what the producer doesn't want to implement in firmware, they might miss some future upgrade sales... I am currently thinking on buying a FujiFilm X-T4, and I was pleased to see there is a SDK, but now, finding out that using the SDK is practically forbidden (until the warranty ends), it makes me stop and think about my decision... What could the SDK do to the camera so that it voids the warranty? (On the other hand, given the quality of camera brand produced software, I can imagine the quality of the code that went into it...) :)

daveslash 5y ago
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://www.amazon.com/Remote-Control-Wireless-Shutter-Release/dp/B07T21VN84/ https://www.amazon.com/Remote-Control-Wireless-Shutter-Relea...
- to11mtm 5y ago
  Not sure, but wanted to toss out there's apparently a github project that does USB Control for at least some Alphas. [0]. 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.) [0] - https://github.com/pixeltris/SonyAlphaUSB https://github.com/pixeltris/SonyAlphaUSB
5y ago

hexo 5y ago

That's certainly illegal here.

EMIRELADERO 5y ago

> Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Fujifilm hereby grants to you a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and royalty-free license to; (a) use, modify and make a limited number of copies of the SDK solely for the purpose of the Development; Later in the same agreement... > 3.5 You shall not (and shall not permit others), to reverse engineer, reverse compile, or disassemble the SDK in any way(in whole or in part); and you shall not (and shall not permit others) to use any method to trace, decompile, or disassemble the SDK. So, which one is it?

detaro 5y ago
You can do all modifications that do not involve things banned in the second quote?
- EMIRELADERO 5y ago
  And what would those entail? How could one modify an SDK without disassembling or even debugging?
  - gambiting 5y ago
    An SDK typically isn't a binary blob - it's usually a collection of header files you can integrate into your projects, media assets, config files etc. All of those can by modified by hand without disassembling anything.
    - EMIRELADERO 5y ago
      That is true. It would be interesting to see this played out in court. When there are doubts around a certain clause on a contract of adhesion/license with non-negotiable terms, courts tend to side with the interpretation most favorable to the consumer.
  - detaro 5y ago
    Even just adapting examples or build scripts would be "modification", that was the kind of thing I was thinking of first.

Maursault 5y ago

I, for one, can forgive FujiFilm... because, even though recently finally discontinued, they gave us FujiChrome Velvia 100 (& 50).

gmiller123456 5y ago
My jaw hit the floor for a second. They appear to have only discontinued the sheet versions of Velvia 50, and still make 35mm and 120.
- Maursault 5y ago
  Condolences. https://fujiaddict.com/2021/07/06/fujichrome-velvia-100-discontinued-today-and-banned-for-sale-in-the-us-starting-september-5-2021/ https://fujiaddict.com/2021/07/06/fujichrome-velvia-100-disc...
  - gmiller123456 5y ago
    That's for Velvia 100, Velvia 50 is still available. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/512063-USA/Fujifilm_15757464_RVP_135_36_Fujichrome_Velvia.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/512063-USA/Fujifilm_1...
astrange 5y ago
They also make medium format mirrorless cameras, which are a great way to feel superior to all the people who think "DSLR" is what you call a high-end digital camera. I can't quite bring myself to spend the money to get a GFX 100S though.
- anta40 5y ago
  The price for 2nd hand GFX 50S or 50R is very tempting. For enthusiasts like me who rarely make huge prints and mostly only post on social medias, 50 MP is waayyy more than enough :D
  - 5y ago

themerone 5y ago

This is illegal in the US due to the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. They can only void the warrenty if they can prove that the damage is the result of the SDK usage.

awinter-py 5y ago

also interesting is the following clause > 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)

ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
Of course it isn't good that the warranty is being voided, but as a matter of contract this particular clause seems very logical. For the consumer it is good to know when you are being provided a third-party service/app that could void a warranty, and a clause like this makes the third-party provider liable for non-disclosure of the risks.
- awinter-py 5y ago
  but they're not being provided a 3rd-party app that voids a warranty they're getting a 1st party app that (if you think this contract is enforceable) voids the warranty in practice, this whole page of products https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/software https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/software probably (I'm guessing) uses the sdk, is probably advertised as part of the product's value, and doesn't say anything about warranty if fuji finds out you used the camera with photoshop, then uses that to reject a subsequent repair (related or unrelated to sdk), this seems like a reasonable case for false advertising and a refund

TheMagicHorsey 5y ago

I have a Fujifilm XPro3. My favorite camera of all time. But I would trade it in for a camera with equivalent specs that runs a proper operating system and supports app development. Cameras are so far behind smartphones in terms of their software that it has become embarrassing. Paying $2000+ for a camera, only to find out your smartphone does a better job of autofocusing and handling noise is just annoying.

daleharvey 5y ago

This SDK only works on the top end Fuji's, the cheapest one supported starts at £850 (body only) Fuji has famously terrible app support, its a nightmare to set up and cuts out constantly, transferring images over wifi is slow and unreliable to the point of it being useless, the remote shutter is unreliable and doesnt have any of the extremely simple to program features that intervalometer's have. You can't shoot tethered unless you have one of the above very expensive cameras. The whole software ecosystem around cameras is awful, I would love to see some open source community initiatives to be able to control these cameras and extend their functionality but I haven't seen much of that in the photography community.

HNHatesUsers 5y ago
The lack of an intervalometer in ANY camera today is an insufferable insult. Not to mention that the assertion in the title of this post is wrong, at least in the USA. We have a federal law called the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act that makes it illegal to void the warranty of a product simply because the user modified it. Canon cameras have enjoyed some fairly active open-source/hacker support. Check out Magic Lantern and CHDK (I can't tell if that one's still maintained).
ashtonkem 5y ago
I haven’t tried Magic Lantern yet, but I have been reasonably happy with Canon’s remote app. It has been reliable so far, with the only downside being that it doesn’t offer GPS tagging for my camera (EOS 80D)
KolenCh 5y ago
First sentence incorrect. £850 is not top end. A typical high end camera product would starts at $2000, and nowadays more often than not is $3000+. A quick search shows the top end of Fuji X mount is $2000+. And that’s not even the top end of Fuji’s, which goes to the medium format GFX mount. For your other points, I know you’re talking about app, but Fiji has been famous about their software support in terms of how long they continue to update their firmware. They even market it Kaizen. And it is an objective truth that you can verify by comparing to how often other brands upgrade their firmware (Sony is not bad but still not as good.) There exists open source softwares on camera, just may be not Fuji (I don’t know.) If you want open source softwares running on camera which significantly increases its capability, try Canon’s. That one is the most mature.

kejaed 5y ago

https://cascable.se/ios/ https://cascable.se/ios/ For those looking to use something in between some of the horrible official camera apps and implementing something with this SDK, Cascable is really quite nice. I find it well worth the subscription. Before the official SDK came out, I tried using this project that was working on reverse engineering the protocol for Fuji cameras: https://github.com/hkr/fuji-cam-wifi-tool https://github.com/hkr/fuji-cam-wifi-tool Alas, I’m working with an X-T2 and it is not supported by the official SDK.

traviszhong 5y ago

Some android phones unlock bootloader also voids warranty.

t0bia_s 5y ago

It would be great to have on Fuji cameras something like Magic Lantern on Canon's. Technically camera HW is capable of much more than manufacturer allow to do with software. They usually support cameras with updates for 2 years and and then nothing. I understand that it is more profitable to make new cameras but it is not sustainable and eventually all consumer camera manufacturer will have to change their approach, because this industry slowly dying in consumer area. And it is not necessary because of smartphones but also because cameras since circa 2014 are good enough to keep them until die, not to switch every year. I'm using Fuji cameras for pro work over 5 years now and I still mostly use X-T2 and x100F. Those are most reliable cameras I have. Very solid construction, "made in Japan". X-T3 feels very plasticky. Same for X-T4.

cfn 5y ago

I have an XE 4 and I also investigated the possibility but they don't even provide headers for all the models. I would have to buy one of the few supported models to be able to play with the SDK. They are missing a big oportunity and whoever wakes up first may get a nice boost from computational photography afficionados as well as many specialized fields. I understand that they are trying to save development time by not building the necessary safeguards and I wish they published some less invasive way to communicate with the cameras such as over bluetooth or Wifi which many cameras already support.

m000 5y ago

An interesting question here is: How would they know that you used the SDK? Does the camera have non-volatile memory for saving that piece of info? Assuming that it does, how can they make that bit tamper-proof? Not that tamper-proofing is undoable, but it would require a lot of expensive engineering, just to save them from replacing a few dozens of cameras that presumably may break because of incorrect use of the SDK.

Goz3rr 5y ago
I have no idea what the exact hardware inside of the camera is, but almost every microcontroller has something like eFuses or one time programmable memory in this day and age. Not a lot of expensive engineering required, just a few hours of software development for the camera firmware and SDK developers. It'll be good enough for most warranty cases you can now hand wave away.