[swanlefitte]

From the company's standpoint, the answer is: "Till the warranty is over,"

Second, they did fix many cameras under warranty when consumers specifically asked for it, identifying the problem, even when it was out of the initial warranty phase.

The fact they did fix cameras out of warranty will probably be used to say they have an implied warranty. If they refused to be "nice" and strictly enforced the warranty is over, they would have a better case.
Like before the Good Samaritan laws, unlike countries with duty to resecue laws, doctors refused to help people they came across hurt on the street because they were getting sued for offering help. In fact in Alabama only medical workers are protected.

[reh321]

I agree it's not a great motor - I called it "consumer level technology", because that's what Canon and Nikon used in their consumer level lenses.

I disagree with your characterization. I switched from Pentax to Canon in 1995 because I liked the EF/USM lenses so much, and the first two lenses {both clearly “consumer” lenses} I purchased were still working quickly and quietly nearly twenty years later when I lost one of them shortly before I came back to Pentax.

[luftfluss]

I disagree with your characterization. I switched from Pentax to Canon in 1995 because I liked the EF/USM lenses so much, and the first two lenses {both clearly “consumer” lenses} I purchased were still working quickly and quietly nearly twenty years later when I lost one of them shortly before I came back to Pentax.

Canon uses several different motors in their lenses, and at least one lens - it might be a 50mm - has a reputation of being less reliable than others.

[Kunzite]

I disagree with your characterization. I switched from Pentax to Canon in 1995 because I liked the EF/USM lenses so much, and the first two lenses {both clearly “consumer” lenses} I purchased were still working quickly and quietly nearly twenty years later when I lost one of them shortly before I came back to Pentax.

Both Canon and Nikon used "ultrasonic" micromotors similar to the original SDM. Likewise, the ring-type SDM is similar to the ring-type USM/SWM.
As for Pentax having issues with their first attempt... who said Canon and Nikon got it right the first time?

[stevebrot]

I think it mostly comes down to a question of how long things should last. From a consumer standpoint the answer is "Till I decide I want a new item to replace this." From the company's standpoint, the answer is: "Till the warranty is over," which in the case of camera gear in North America is 1 year (most credit cards add a second year if purchased with them).

The IRS says fully depreciated in five years if used for business purposes.

At current pricing, I would expect 3-5 years use from a K-70. If purchased at release for about $650, I would still have expected 3-5 years. If I want assurance it will last more than 3 years, I would buy insurance in the form of an extended warranty. In other words, it is the market segment as well as the price that guides my expectation. My expectation would be no higher for a Canon or Nikon dSLR priced under $900.

If I bought a KP, I would expect 5 years minimum, based on its release price and target market (mid-range enthusiast)

I bought my K-3 in spring of 2014 and have had it a few months over six years. My expectation when I bought it was 7+ years of service and if it quits next spring, I will be quite satisfied. If it quits this month, I will still be quite satisfied and will grab a K-70 or KP as a replacement.

If I had bought a K-50 December of 2014,* I would have been more than mildly perturbed if it had aperture control issues summer of 2017. After all, there had been more than adequate time for Ricoh to both detect and mitigate the issue. The low purchase price would have tempered my displeasure a little, but I still would have expected 3-5 years of service. I would have begrudgingly ponied up the $150 Precision was charging at the time and consoled myself that total outlay was still acceptable. If the same had happened before the two year point (e.g. fall of 2016)...I would have been profoundly unhappy...'nuff said.


Steve

* I actually did consider buying one as a second body at that time.

[normhead]

If the same had happened before the two year point (e.g. fall of 2016)...I would have been profoundly unhappy...'nuff said.

And I'm guessing this would be true for anyone. However, the important thing will be, how prevalent was the problem, what did they know, when did they know it?

For example, if the camera has a better than average life expectancy than other cameras of it's price, Pentax cold argue that even though this one problem was a thing, it was still better than what the industry standard was and that purchasers of other systems weren't getting anything better. The whole "I would have bought something else if I'd known thing" goes out the window if nothing else available at the same time for the same price was any better. The whole issue has always been, we don't know enough to rush to judgement. We still don't.

[stevebrot]

And I'm guessing this would be true for anyone. However, the important thing will be, how prevalent was the problem, what did they know, when did they know it?

It looks like you have the bases covered. Conventional wisdom has been...

• Both the number of cameras affected and the percentage of those purchased remains unknown, probably even to Ricoh.
• When Ricoh's quality assurance team became aware is hard to say. Few, if any cameras or bad aperture control block assemblies were cycling back through the warranty service/replacement control points and it is hard to say whether an uptick on applicable parts sales would have been called to their attention. We do know that by early 2015, Ricoh Imaging North America was extending warranty coverage several additional months for this problem.
• When the problem was fully characterized is also hard to say, as is when, if ever, an effective fix made its way into production. Ricoh's detractors suggest very early detection with the cause being obvious and a calculated decision to continue producing and selling known bad cameras, a situation that continues with the K-70. OTOH, anecdotal evidence drawn from reports here suggests that the Ricoh changed something that resulted in significant fall-off of aperture control failure on the K-S1 and K-S2 bodies that continued with the K-70 release.

Steve

[reh321]

Both Canon and Nikon used "ultrasonic" micromotors similar to the original SDM. Likewise, the ring-type SDM is similar to the ring-type USM/SWM.
As for Pentax having issues with their first attempt... who said Canon and Nikon got it right the first time?

My point was that mine were clearly consumer-level, but clearly both lasted for nearly twenty years. There was clearly nothing wrong with the technology.

[travelswsage]

Sadly, it sucks for everyone all round, except the attorneys. Folks who had the problem feel let down, some have probably left the brand, Ricoh has probably lost a few customers, some goodwill, and is now stuck defending their actions in a lawsuit. Everyone currently invested in the system can expect any sums expended for prosecuting/settling this case to not have that money invested in moving the systems forward. Seems pretty much a loser for all.

[swanlefitte]

We don't know. Do the lawyers know? I suspect they don't and the only way to get to any records is to file a suit. Does anyone know if it is usual for a law firm looking for cases to just follow leads in order to get access to records? This could be all that is going on if my hypothesis is correct. This may be a preliminary measure to gain access to records to ascertain if pursuit of the case is worthwhile only.

[travelswsage]

Discovery is extremely expensive, judges generally don't allow overbroad or "fishing expedition" motions. It usually needs to be narrowly tailored and have underlying support.

[clackers]

Can I just do a diversion to applaud how everyone here has handled what is a controversial discussion of our beloved brand?

I posted where the moderators are pleading for civility:

"In one thread I've admitted I've supported the lawsuit initiated against Ricoh over the aperture block issue, even supplying the lawyers with advice. No shortage of the people I like have then disagreed with me, but all factual, all respectful so far, because there's no doubt I'm one of their brothers."

[stevebrot]

Can I just do a diversion to applaud how everyone here has handled what is a controversial discussion of our beloved brand?

I posted where the moderators are pleading for civility:

"In one thread I've admitted I've supported the lawsuit initiated against Ricoh over the aperture block issue, even supplying the lawyers with advice. No shortage of the people I like have then disagreed with me, but all factual, all respectful so far, because there's no doubt I'm one of their brothers."

Thanks for sharing this!

Despite my pessimism regarding the class action suit, I am in full sympathy with those who bought cameras that let them down. I still feel a hurt inside when remembering the first handful of help requests for K-30s having dark frames and the efforts taken by members here to devise a sieve to differentiate that issue from metering, shutter, or lens problems. To see the problem continue to the K-50 was unexpected and a huge disappointment. I advised people to buy that camera, including persons close to me. The whole matter is personal.

I do believe that the lawsuit, even if heard by the court and is successful, is unlikely to provide any meaningful reward to class members. That saddens me, mostly because of the number of people here that have shared their expectation that justice would include a full refund or replacement with a camera model that uses a different aperture control mechanism (e.g. a KP). Justice is an increasingly rare commodity.


Steve

[Not a Number]

The times I've gotten anything from class action suits have been a joke. One was from a health insurance company that was ripping people off for thousands of dollars for basically useless coverage. The award? Some crummy discount vouchers for health care products or a gym/spa.

The other was from Verizon or Frontier overcharging late or other service fees. The award was under $30 and much less than what I was charged for in the time period covered by the suit. The "award" was applied to one of my monthly bills and didn't even cover the bill.

There was another one that I don't even remember what was for. The "award" amount to less than $3 dollars and the steps to go through to collect it wasn't worth it.

Good luck.

[stevebrot]

The other was from Verizon or Frontier overcharging late or other service fees. The award was under $30 and much less than what I was charged for in the time period covered by the suit.

Behind me on the counter is a similar a class-action announcement regarding pricing practices by CenturyLink for land-line and Internet. The proposed reward was $30, though the actual amount might be prorated down depending on the number of class members that opt to participate. The amount I was overcharged was several hundred dollars over the period of the complaint. I missed the deadline...my loss.


Steve