Turn your 300D into a 10D...

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Scott Howard, Jun 4, 2004.

  1. Scott Howard

    Scott Howard Guest

    Scott Howard, Jun 4, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Scott Howard

    Huey Fong Guest

    Turn you 300D into a useless piece of junk too, if you try to go back to the
    original OS and make a warranty claim!
    HF
     
    Huey Fong, Jun 4, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Scott Howard

    FuTAnT Guest

    Well, if it's a mechanical problem there's nothing that the firmware could
    have done to it. If it's a software problem, then for sure, you won't get
    warranty. They shouldn't be charging you very much on a software reload
    though, takes all of 4 minutes to do. If they tried pulling shit like that
    on you when it was a mechanical problem you'd have a good case for Dept of
    Fair Trading/Consumer affairs etc.

    Cam
     
    FuTAnT, Jun 4, 2004
    #3
  4. Scott Howard

    Huey Fong Guest

    Quite clearly you have never read the Australian Trade Practices Act.
    Warranty does not cover stupidity.
    HF
     
    Huey Fong, Jun 4, 2004
    #4
  5. Scott Howard

    Ken Chandler Guest

    On what part of the Act are you proposing that a warranty may be made void
    for /any/ fault where there is evidence of use of third party accessories or
    software, assuming of course that there is no proof that those
    accessories/software caused said fault.

    Curious.
     
    Ken Chandler, Jun 4, 2004
    #5
  6. Scott Howard

    Huey Fong Guest

    If the camera is dead and it's got hacked firmware... Canon's warranty
    exclusions are valid.
    HF
     
    Huey Fong, Jun 4, 2004
    #6
  7. -------------------
    The implication that you imply here ken is somewhat odd. It is akin to
    modifying the computer in a car, blowing the engine because your hack let
    it over rev and then expecting a new engine under warranty. It just
    doesn't happen.

    If you hack your firmware and kill your camera, there is
    no way you can invoke a law to force the maker into honoring a warranty
    claim. I will concede though that Canon are among the most liberal of
    Australian Camera importers when it comes to warranty but even they would
    have a problem with the above scenario.

    Douglas
     
    Douglas MacDonald, Jun 4, 2004
    #7
  8. Scott Howard

    Edge Guest

    Ah.. found that out the hard way eh?
     
    Edge, Jun 4, 2004
    #8
  9. Scott Howard

    Edge Guest

    You quoted the legislation, he asked you which part. Answer the question.
     
    Edge, Jun 4, 2004
    #9
  10. Scott Howard

    FuTAnT Guest

    If of course the Firmware would do such a thing. Are you saying I could bump
    up the FPS on the EOS300D and burn out the motor? I'd say not! If the
    Firmware DID cause a mechanical failure, for sure, no warranty. However, I'm
    having a hard time thinking of how or what in the custom functions would
    cause any mechanical failure of the camera body? Any ideas?

    Cam
     
    FuTAnT, Jun 5, 2004
    #10
  11. Scott Howard

    Miro Guest

    A limping camera gets no sympathy but a broken door stop seems to get
    replaced. Go figure.
     
    Miro, Jun 5, 2004
    #11
  12. Scott Howard

    Ken Chandler Guest

    [crosspost to aus.legal added.

    For a background refer to this article:
    <http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/02/004258&mode=thread&tid=137&tid=
    164&tid=185>]

    I believe your example is not 'akin' to what I wrote. In your example, A
    car is damaged by over revving, running the engine outside of the
    specification for that engine. With the manufacturers firmware this damage
    could not have occurred. A modification was made to run the car out of
    specification and damage is shown as a direct result of this. The warranty
    on the vehicle is NOT void. The damage caused by the over-revving is
    chargeable.
    If you read what I wrote again ...

    As far as I can see there is no modification in the firmware that allows the
    camera to operate under any undue stress like that cited in your example of
    the vehicle rev limiter.

    If the LCD backlight fails on a 300D and that 300D is running a modified
    firmware I have my doubts about the legality of the warranty being
    dishonoured. Same goes for shutter failure, button failure, mirror falling
    off, CMOS imager failure.

    Unless it is the firmware that has caused the fault to occur, why would the
    warranty be invalid?
    They might have a problem covering it, but can they legally not cover it?
    Mr Fong claimed that the TPA would allow for the invalidation of warranty, I
    have asked Mr Fong to cite the legislation he refers to as I believe the
    information he offered to be incorrect. At the same time, if I am incorrect
    I would like to know.

    FWIW I do not own a 300D and have no interest in 'hacking' one.
     
    Ken Chandler, Jun 5, 2004
    #12
  13. Scott Howard

    Technoaussie Guest

    FYI... I sold the camera to Huey in the first place. He used the Russian
    hack to blast his firmware and it killed the camera. No switch on anymore
    OK?

    All the rubbish you lot are on about is dangerous stuff for people like Huey
    who thought he could buy a $1700 camera and for a bit of activity with a PC,
    make it into a $2800 camera. Be warned. Many of the hacks getting around
    have the potential to kill the cameras just as surely as using an old, hight
    voltage flash on the hotshoe.

    In advance, sorry to say this publicly Huey...
    There is no part of the Trade Practices act requiring manufacturers or
    retailers to do anything when a fault is caused by a wilful act of vandalism
    by the owner. All the sites you can download these hacks from warn you of
    the likely consequences of using the stuff before you start. What is it
    about you jokers that makes you think you can get something for nothing?

    TA
     
    Technoaussie, Jun 5, 2004
    #13
  14. Scott Howard

    Miro Guest


    aus.legal ? How profound.
     
    Miro, Jun 5, 2004
    #14
  15. Scott Howard

    Ken Chandler Guest

    I realise that nobody posting in aus.legal would have your depth of
    experience or wealth of knowledge Uncle Miro, but I thought I'd ask anyway.
     
    Ken Chandler, Jun 5, 2004
    #15
  16. Scott Howard

    Miro Guest

    The mear fact that you think you have a consumer right is profound. You may
    ask anyone you like, its just as useful as asking nobody since the final
    choice lays with the repairer not the screaming twit.
     
    Miro, Jun 5, 2004
    #16
  17. Scott Howard

    Lionel Guest

    You'd be surprised.
    Having worked for Canons service department in the past, as well as a
    couple of Canon-authorised service centres, it used to amaze me how
    often Canon were willing to repair stupidity-induced faults under
    warranty, purely to retain customer goodwill. (The classic example was
    brand new inkjets where the user had failed to remove the bright orange
    sealing strip from the ink cartridge - we used to see several of them a
    week.)
    I can't speak for their policy on modded cameras, but I expect that
    their policy would be similar their policy about broken inkjet printers
    that had been used with non-Canon ink, which, (at the time I was working
    with them) is that they'd charge the customer a service fee *if* they
    could prove that *physical damage* had been caused by the 3rd party ink,
    but would cover anything else that would normally be covered under
    warranty. In the case of DSLRs, I think it's likely that they'd re-flash
    the ROM back to the factory version, & if that fixed it, they'd charge
    you a service fee. If the fault was still there, they'd most likely fix
    it as usual, then give you a lecture about installing hacked firmaware
    on it.
    If I were to screw up a firmware mod on my own camera, I'd take it to an
    authorised service centre, rather than to Canon itself, & just take my
    chances on copping a fee.
     
    Lionel, Jun 5, 2004
    #17
  18. Scott Howard

    Marli Guest

    The fact you do get more... for nothing :)
     
    Marli, Jun 5, 2004
    #18
  19. Scott Howard

    John Ewing Guest

    I agree - despite all the gloom spelt out in the warranty the outcome is
    often decided by the goodwill of the supplier and the attititude of the
    purchaser.

    I have had more pleasant surprises than disappointments, even when I have
    admitted that I was partly to blame for the failure.

    John
     
    John Ewing, Jun 5, 2004
    #19
  20. Scott Howard

    Lionel Guest

    Yep. I've actually written warranty documents myself (*not* for Canon!),
    & they're primarily an arse-covering measure. They're intended to stop
    people trying to sue you out of business, rather than to deny reasonable
    claims. No matter what many people think, most companies would rather
    wear an hour or two of labour & $30 in parts than gain a pissed-off
    ex-customer. Mind you, they'll change their tune quick smart if you back
    your car over your gizmo & bring it in for warranty service, or expect
    them to fix screwed up software every couple of weeks. (And yes, I've
    had to deal with customers like this - and worse.)
     
    Lionel, Jun 5, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.