|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
09-29-2021, 07:55 PM
|
| |
I literally kept shooting in any weather, as the add told me to do (actually I ran for cover but you get the point). How is that a misread? And if Id sent what I was replying to you would see where grace was missing. Note this was me "venting" after the very poor grace of the "good will" letter I received after previous very civil dialog when I could get the "repair centre" to reply at all. And 3 months after Id returned my camera and not been able to get it back, get any certainty re outcome etc. This is how one feels AFTER dealing with this gentleman not my starting position. Id also note that the staff at local CR Kennedy (the Australian agents) were always fine, helpful, we didn't and dont have any "issues" and compared notes re our past experiences with weather resistant Pentax (I have 2 older ones still working, despite being, like this one, occasionally it in a tropical afternoon storm). We are happy. One wannabe CSI investigator not so much but no doubt he was under pressure from above. Also you will find Australian consumer protection law looks on this sort of thing in a very specific way, other jurisdictions may be better or worse, from a consumer perspective).
|
|
Forum: Repairs and Warranty Service
09-28-2021, 03:05 PM
|
| |
My K3 II died back in 2016 after using it in rain with a WR prime (so no zoom bellows effect) lens. My camera damage "investigated" by an individual at Ricoh's Australian distributor who had the amazing forensic ability to tell exactly what Id done to the camera despite my having no recollection of these events (immersing the camera in water). My warranty claim was denied but eventually as a "gesture of goodwill" I received a replacement camera. As the remainder of that "good will" email was full of accusations and also stated that the replacement carried no warranty I did find it necessary to send the folllwing ln reply. I should also note the replacement camera has performed just fine:
Thanks for resolving this.
Seeing as, despite claims of good will, you find it necessary to make accusations that the damage is not consistent with using the camera in a way consistent with the way it is promoted to be used, I do feel obliged to clarify a few things for you.
I don't have qualifications in forensics, and I don't dispute the actual evidence you found.
I do dispute your conclusions, obviously, because I know what actually happened to the camera. Which I've told you but you chose not to believe.
In the real world, in real use, in a coastal area, I would guess that it's likely there is salt in the air, the trees, the everything. And then it rains. But that's just my unqualified speculation on why. And then of course, the water evaporates - concentrating the minerals. Especially/obviously internally where its impossible to wipe dry (and of course, where the water should never have reached) , and around lumps and bumps/places water gets trapped - I guess. But really - the strap? There's a good chance corrosion there is the cumulative effect of my using the camera on hot days (i.e. perspiration)... I didn't return the camera for repair for some corrosion on a strap lug (which, to be honest, I hadn't ever noticed)!
And then there is the "mystery" of why the left side and bottom got wet. Let me help you out with the answer to that one:
The camera grip is on the right where the SD card slots are, and as I was holding the camera, my hand would have protected that side. Or - here's a thought - maybe the seals on that side actually worked as promised. In any case you apparently found evidence that the seals on the unprotected side leaked (presumably - I'm going on what you report re where the water damage was). I'd guess gravity plays a part in how water also ended up at the bottom. Not an expert but I've observed water generally flows down hill. I don't really know. If I wanted BS forensics I'd watch CSI or something... And, of course, another reason why only part of the camera leaked could be that maybe some of the weatherproofing actually worked as advertised. Nobody is disputing that water got in, not sure why you find evidence that it only got in in some places to be "incriminating". I mean, if I'd actually submerged it in water, rather than just having it in rain, I'd guess it would have leaked everywhere?
I do know that regardless of whatever may be written on page 111 of a manual, Australian consumer law applies. I bought a product based on its description and used it for the purpose, and in the way described. It failed. Maybe Pentax Japan are unaware of the rather clear cut obligations of the Australian supplier of goods to supply product that is fit for purpose and to fix, replace or refund if it isn't. But realistically, it is completely implausible that you are. So call it good will if you like - but it would seem more like good will if you weren't so accusatory and reluctant to address the problem in the first place. If you are in fact stating that it is not ok to "Keep shooting in the most extreme field conditions" please stop claiming that it is in your product description at point of sale (not on page 111 of the manual!).
Once again, thanks for the replacement. I look forward to many years of trouble free use.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-19-2017, 02:16 PM
|
| |
Yes. Now you mention it, I think you are right. The power of suggestion plus some lighting misled me.... Looking at it again it does look ok.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-18-2017, 05:05 PM
|
| |
Looks wrong compared to mine too. There is shielding that I'm not going to poke at flat against side of slot in that area. Assembly or repair error/damage to that? On a new camera?
|
