[redrockcoulee]

Seems to me that prior to the introduction of the K5 people on the forum were bemoaning the lack of a road map of future cameras. However as soon as the K5 was announced there were complaints about the camera not being available immediately. And now that the product did not have long term multi circumstance testing.

There is a limit on how fast a company can put a product onto the market and time to test etc. If we expect a camera or lens to be fully tested and all the bugs worked out then perhaps we should not expect it to get to market as fast as possible. If we expect a new product to be on the market sooner than perhaps we should expect bugs in the product or software not ready for prime time to occur. Expectations need to be reasonable. This is not saying that the company itself does not have responsibity to provide a finished product but with the fast turn around of models and each with a brand new sensor when are the manufactures able to do long term multi situation tests and still get us the camera when we want it which is usually a couple of weeks after its predessor has been launched (perhaps a slight exaggeration).

[krebsy75]

A recall is only required when a user's safety is at risk.

Regarding defects, it would be interesting to hear from a reseller how Pentax fares amongst the competition. Heck, a rental provider could provide some good insight.

I think this whole "QC Problem" is a myth created by forums. Every camera company has lemon units in every production line. It's not like people who have perfectly working units are creating threads stating "my camera works 100%!" en mass the way people who ARE having problems do. So of course it seems like there are lots of problems. If 1000 people out of 100,000 have bad cameras, and even a small number of those go onto a forum and post about it, it's going to seem like fluke units are everywhere.

So I'll start it. I have purchased a K-5, the dreaded 16-50mm zoom, a 70mm 2.4, and a 31mm 1.8, plus a super risky second battery. I can report they function perfectly! My SDM moter has not died, I have no sensor stains, my camera focuses accurately with all my lenses! Pentax must be doing something rigth! Holy Crapy! It Works! I can't imagine what's going on in those factories but apparently it's the construction of properly functioning cameras!

And for the record I rented a D7000 before I decided on the K-5, and that worked too.

If there was a serious QC issue there would be recalls people, I'm pretty sure it's illegal to sell broken units in mass.

[Rondec]

Doesn't alter the fact that if a company offers a product of a certain standard then should the product fail to meet it then it is not fit for purpose and we start entering the world of consumer law. Whether it's only one in a million or five in a thousand is irrelevant, the consumer has the right to to expect and receive what he was led to believe he was purchasing.

Now I quite accept that there may be a problem with any item bought be it a car or camera but the test to my mind is how it is put right. If a issue is admitted to and corrected promptly then I have on argument but denial, evasion and attempts to shift the responsibility back on to the purchaser pee's me off no end.

Nothing new about the customer doing the beta testing BTW. British Leyland/Rover were infamous for it during the 70's and 80's.

As long as the product is supported under warranty, I don't know that the consumer can complain too much. Particularly since there aren't many injuries from defective cameras (unlike, say, a tire or vehicle issue).

[luftfluss]

A recall is only required when a user's safety is at risk.

Regarding defects, it would be interesting to hear from a reseller how Pentax fares amongst the competition. Heck, a rental provider could provide some good insight.

A few years ago I worked at a company that supported over 100,000 laptops for about a dozen international organizations. The laptops ranged from consumer-grade Dell, HP, Toshiba, etc. to true business-class machines from HP & Lenovo. Our repair records showed a striking similarity in the repair rate (70% +/- 3%) in the consumer-grade laptops, no matter the brand. The business-class laptops fared about 10% better, IIRC.

[justinr]

As long as the product is supported under warranty, I don't know that the consumer can complain too much. Particularly since there aren't many injuries from defective cameras (unlike, say, a tire or vehicle issue).

I should imagine that it depends upon the consumer law in the country concerned but certainly in Ireland the following requirements apply -

1.Goods must be of merchantable quality – goods should be of reasonable quality taking into account what they are meant to do, their durability and their price

2.Goods must be fit for their purpose – they must do what they are reasonably expected to do

3.Goods must be as described - the buyer must not be mislead into buying something by the description of goods or services given orally by a salesperson or an advertisement.

Warranty doesn't come into it for that, as I understand it, is a part of the contract the seller need not offer, all he need do is ensure that the above criteria are met. If a camera is faulty then it may fall foul of one or more of the above and the retailer would be required to make amends, there is no set time limit although a court may regard a year as being a reasonable period in which any preventable faults may manifest themselves.

There was a case in the UK motor trade recently where the manufacturer was ordered to correct a known fault well after the 12 month warranty had expired. It was on the Land Rover Discovery where the gear drive to the oil pump came apart seizing the engine, Ford, for it was they who owned the company at the time, were forced to recall all the affected models up to 4 years old. You'd have thought that after the Pinto memo they would have known better.

[Docrwm]

K-r - focusing issue
K-5 - stains on sensor

These are more than just a few forum reports

[Rondec]

I should imagine that it depends upon the consumer law in the country concerned but certainly in Ireland the following requirements apply -

1.Goods must be of merchantable quality – goods should be of reasonable quality taking into account what they are meant to do, their durability and their price

2.Goods must be fit for their purpose – they must do what they are reasonably expected to do

3.Goods must be as described - the buyer must not be mislead into buying something by the description of goods or services given orally by a salesperson or an advertisement.

Warranty doesn't come into it for that, as I understand it, is a part of the contract the seller need not offer, all he need do is ensure that the above criteria are met. If a camera is faulty then it may fall foul of one or more of the above and the retailer would be required to make amends, there is no set time limit although a court may regard a year as being a reasonable period in which any preventable faults may manifest themselves.

There was a case in the UK motor trade recently where the manufacturer was ordered to correct a known fault well after the 12 month warranty had expired. It was on the Land Rover Discovery where the gear drive to the oil pump came apart seizing the engine, Ford, for it was they who owned the company at the time, were forced to recall all the affected models up to 4 years old. You'd have thought that after the Pinto memo they would have known better.

Hard to see how most of those things apply to consumer electronics. Problems identified after the initial twelve month period are unlikely to be due to a faulty product. Problems that are identified before that twelve month mark should be dealt with under warranty.

As far as I know, Pentax has tried to take care of people with regards to the issues it has, to the point of replacing problematic cameras.

[kenyee]

A few years ago I worked at a company that supported over 100,000 laptops for about a dozen international organizations. The laptops ranged from consumer-grade Dell, HP, Toshiba, etc. to true business-class machines from HP & Lenovo. Our repair records showed a striking similarity in the repair rate (70% +/- 3%) in the consumer-grade laptops, no matter the brand. The business-class laptops fared about 10% better, IIRC.

From my personal experience...
two inspirons I recommended (to my regret) to a client died just out of warranty
two hp consumer level laptops my brother bought had their motherboards and fans die just out of warranty

My thinkpad outlasted all of these...I'm really surprised your thinkpads didn't last longer...

[Rupert]

I think QC could be better, with most any brand....camera or anything else, but perfection is always just a dream.
My biggest complaint is how a problem is handled, is it acknowledged, is it remedied, is the communication good ....or non-existent. These are areas where I hope Ricoh shows a difference to its customers. I can live with problems, if I see genuine concern that they need to be addressed....I think most of us can, and do. Being left in the dark does not build loyalty or a faithful customer base.

Regards

[luftfluss]

From my personal experience...
two inspirons I recommended (to my regret) to a client died just out of warranty
two hp consumer level laptops my brother bought had their motherboards and fans die just out of warranty

My thinkpad outlasted all of these...I'm really surprised your thinkpads didn't last longer...

We lumped in everything with our repair stats... user error, damage due to user negligence, damage due to user's cat puking on the open laptop(!). Actually longevity wasn't much of an issue, as most of our clients were on 3 year upgrade cycles.

I have a Thinkpad 360Cse (it's a 486DX cpu!) that fell of a shelf 6' up... the casing by the floppy drive broke, but it still works perfectly.

[mdbrown]

Personally, I think it's a combination of the internet makes problems seem more widespread and secondly I think people sometimes expect too much. I worked on the F-4 Phantom when I was in the Air Force (yes, I'm dating myself!) That had been in service for over 20 years when I was working on it... and they were still finding things that needed fixing and updating. No product is ever going to be perfect. While I don't condone releasing sub par products I also believe that one can always find a weakness in almost anything. My K100D is awful when it comes to auto white balance in incandescent light.... I think Pentax owes me a K-5 for my troubles!

As an aside, rather than wish for and celebrate a problem product from the competition I would wish for Pentax to make more and better products and market them better. That way I would want a Pentax over a D7000 because the D7000 is a superb product but the Pentax is better...

[justinr]

Hard to see how most of those things apply to consumer electronics. Problems identified after the initial twelve month period are unlikely to be due to a faulty product. Problems that are identified before that twelve month mark should be dealt with under warranty.

As far as I know, Pentax has tried to take care of people with regards to the issues it has, to the point of replacing problematic cameras.

But they must apply to any goods no matter what category they fall under. Consumer law is there to protect the consumer irrespective of the item and certainly the wording I pasted in from the citizens advice site is deliberately broad to ensure all goods are covered. If there is no chance of redress then the manufacturers and shops can get away with selling any old junk and then walking away from it.

The warranty issue is an interesting one for as I understand it the retailer whom your argument is with in law (not the manufacturer) does not have to offer any sort of warranty or agree to a refund or replacement within 12 months, all he has to do is ensure that the goods meet the criteria already mentioned. In fact I do wonder if we would not be better off without the whole warranty thing because as noted it allows manufacturers to produce goods that will operate for a given period before replacement at the customers expense. If there was no such warranty agreement then the customer may argue that light use of the camera (for example) means that after 18 months of ownership it should still function properly. Conversely the retailer could argue that after 6 months of heavy use it need not be responsible for the item. Warranties are just a convenient way of settling arguments before they happen but they are not a panacea or legal requirement.

[justinr]

Personally, I think it's a combination of the internet makes problems seem more widespread and secondly I think people sometimes expect too much. I worked on the F-4 Phantom when I was in the Air Force (yes, I'm dating myself!) That had been in service for over 20 years when I was working on it... and they were still finding things that needed fixing and updating. No product is ever going to be perfect. While I don't condone releasing sub par products I also believe that one can always find a weakness in almost anything. My K100D is awful when it comes to auto white balance in incandescent light.... I think Pentax owes me a K-5 for my troubles!

As an aside, rather than wish for and celebrate a problem product from the competition I would wish for Pentax to make more and better products and market them better. That way I would want a Pentax over a D7000 because the D7000 is a superb product but the Pentax is better...

I believe that during the Apollo space programme NASA aimed for 95% functionality, ie they tried to ensure that no more than 5% of the systems or components would fail. Not a ticket I'd want to fly to the moon on!

[mdbrown]

But they must apply to any goods no matter what category they fall under. Consumer law is there to protect the consumer irrespective of the item and certainly the wording I pasted in from the citizens advice site is deliberately broad to ensure all goods are covered. If there is no chance of redress then the manufacturers and shops can get away with selling any old junk and then walking away from it.

The warranty issue is an interesting one for as I understand it the retailer whom your argument is with in law (not the manufacturer) does not have to offer any sort of warranty or agree to a refund or replacement within 12 months, all he has to do is ensure that the goods meet the criteria already mentioned. In fact I do wonder if we would not be better off without the whole warranty thing because as noted it allows manufacturers to produce goods that will operate for a given period before replacement at the customers expense. If there was no such warranty agreement then the customer may argue that light use of the camera (for example) means that after 18 months of ownership it should still function properly. Conversely the retailer could argue that after 6 months of heavy use it need not be responsible for the item. Warranties are just a convenient way of settling arguments before they happen but they are not a panacea or legal requirement.

This is a discussion I have had before with one of my other wallet draining hobbies (fountain pens). IMHO, the retailer should not be held liable for the quality (or lack thereof) of a product. The only way they ever should is if they have a hand in the product you get (setup, final qc, etc) and even then it should be limited only to those things they directly effect. The retailer did not design or build the product, they simply made it more convenient for you to obtain said product and they get a small amount for providing that service.

If I buy a camera from you, even though you might be an experienced photographer and have a good understanding of the optical theory and operation unless you are a computer and electrical engineer you likely will know next to nothing about the complex operation of the VLSI ICs and algorithms used by the firmware to make the picture... why then would I hold you responsible for the operation or reliability of the product?

As for warranties in general, they are an admission that at our current level of technology we cannot manufacture items that are infallable. In theory a warranty should last long enough to ensure that there are no defects in the materials it's made of and that it was not improperly assembled. Anything after that enters a very difficult gray area. Using my camera as an example (K100D Super) white balance is awful indoors - should Pentax replace the camera or write new firmware to fix that?

Keep in mind too that no product ever made lives up to it's advertising so many people buy all kinds of products with expectations that cannot be fulfilled. While I would say that reasonable expectations must be met by a product our court system is a shining example of the complete and total death of common sense and so that makes a difficult situation much worse. Referring back to my camera example, did Pentax fail to deliver because the automatic white balance doesn't live up to my preference? It does work as it will change white balance it just does a poor job indoors. Technically it failed to do what it says because it will not properly adjust OTOH, is it a major failing if I have to spend 5 seconds to manually set for incandesant lights? If so, should they send me a rebate, rewrite the firmware, replace with a newer camera???

As far as a sliding warranty like you state, I would say in the case of a camera at least... tie it to shutter actuations otherwise you'd have a warranty 38 pages long of what constitutes light use, moderate use, normal use, heavy use, excessive use and how those multiple definitions effect the warranty time and liability... I do agree though that a simple 3 month/12 month type of warranty is typically inadequate.

[Byrd-2020]

... Keep in mind too that no product ever made lives up to it's advertising so many people buy all kinds of products with expectations that cannot be fulfilled. While I would say that reasonable expectations must be met by a product our court system is a shining example of the complete and total death of common sense and so that makes a difficult situation much worse....

There is something that we should not lose sight of here. The most serious problem with the K-5 is not that 'a few bad ones slipped through qc'. The most serious issue is that there is a design flaw in the K-5's autofocus system.

The camera was designed to accurately autofocus down to EV-1; and, as most of us now know, it doesn't come close to this.

This is not an 'advertising claim' in the sense that 'your photos will just be better with Pentax'. (Nor is it like 'we think our auto white-balance provides nice color'.) It is a precise technical specification--one that Pentax, I'm sure, thought they had met. And, while the folks at Pentax are now scrambling to come up with a firmware fix, it is not at all clear that they'll be able to do so.

Although many K-5 users don't seem concerned about this shortcoming, I think it would be wrong for them (or any of us) simply to say "Hey Pentax, you produced a very nice camera (for the most part), so we won't worry about the fact that it can't live up to its technical specs."

I think we should all hold Pentax's feet to the fire on this one.