Class action lawsuit for Pentax cameras aperture defects filed in New York

Class action lawsuit for Pentax cameras aperture defects filed in New York

Read more: https://pentaxrumors.com/#ixzz6R3t0kvkP

The filed document states that "25. Defendant is one of the largest manufacturers of cameras in the world...". The plaintiff clearly does not know that Pentax is doomed.

Steve

Brilliant.

Wonder if the Plaintiff has some SDM lenses too?

Remains to be seen .
The k50 and K30 , have been discounted for many years now.The K70 also gets a mention in the article.
Seems speculative.

Is this one of those claim companies , that is commission only?

Good on them. Personally I was quite disgusted at how Pentax handled that. I just managed to get in before the warranty period ended, and some did get some grace afterwards, but really it should have been a free recall and replace of a clearly faulty batch of parts. Same mechanism/design had worked for years, but started failing on the K-30 range quite early on.

I've been very impressed with Fuji, in terms of after purchase support updates to port new developments down to refresh older models. The aperture issue was a good example of how a company would handle an issue affecting their customers, and I wasn't impressed. All good for those who luckily did not experience the issue, but troubling for those who did, especially outside of the standard warranty period.

I agree entirely. Pentax/Ricoh behaved in a shameful manner over this whole problem. They did nothing at all.

I wouldn't buy one of the affected cameras due to this problem and I warn others to do the same. People ask me for recommendations for which camera to buy and I can no longer recommend the lower tier of Pentax cameras because of this.

I doubt the claim will get anywhere but perhaps it will act as a warning for the future, to acknowledge and take action when a systemic fault like this comes to light.

Wonder if at last someone will also address the SDM issue?

I am no lawyer but this comes across as speculative, for instance claiming that the fault occurs in a high percentage of the cameras listed (really?) and also that the fault renders other equipment like lenses as useless. I am not defending Ricoh in this but the aim is obviously to get a quick out of court settlement by bringing noisy publicity, which could in turn create long term damage to the company’s reputation and ultimately impact on all of us.

I was aware of the problem and i too managed to fix it at the time. However i do not agree with the lawsuit particularly the timing and who it's aimed at which is more like a blindfold piniata party favour attempt after drinking a bottle of 12 year old scotch. Just what are they expecting to achieve for a component to which there is still no alternative? Nikon had similar area issues with the D600 and D750 but at least they had the option to fix the problem. My own patch job wasn't pretty but it lasted tens of thousands of photos and it certainly did not come close to the cost of a legal battle.
Not to mention we are in the middle of a pandemic.

If Ricoh had stepped up and stopped denying there was an issue* (ditto SDM) these actions wouldn't happen, and I'd like to think that a manufacturer taking responsibility for an issue would attract good press and more customers.

* I accept there were repairs under warrant for some, but the problem continues for many post-warranty. An inherent design fault is an inherent design fault and surely is the sole responsibility of the manufacturer, regardless of when it surfaces. Once it's discovered, the manufacturer should fix it regardless. Whirlpool and tumble dryers!

Whirlpool was a safety issue. Safety is covered by specific law in the UK. See link, section 'Corrective action, recalls and safety incidents'. The Pentax aperture issue was not a safety issue. General consumer rights law applies - and it's different.

Steve

I have to disagree with your argument.

A manufacturing issue is an issue regardless of whether safety is involved. If you design and sell a product, it should be fit for purpose. If it clearly isn't I don't believe we should have to fight for our rights. The aperture block and SDM failures are too frequent to be anything other than design faults and there should be no argument over repairs.

In this instance, too many Pentax togs have suffered aperture block and /or SDM failure.

It should be a simple 'I'm the original owner. Here's the proof. I've used the equipment properly. Where do I send it to have it fixed foc?'. I've read too many instances of users being grateful that, say, SRS have taken up the case, etc. As said at the outset, the manufacturer should step up asap and just fix it.

End of rant!

To me the odd thing is that rather than fix it they continued to bring out further products that had the same issue. You could have forgive them if, for instance, the K-30 was known to have the issue, hence the K-50 had been introduced to rectify that. But later models introduced continued to have the issue.
What I don't know and I doubt many do, is what percentage of these have failed. People don't flood camera forums with posts saying how wonderful their camera aperture block has been! It's something they take for granted.

It's impossible to say how many have failed. People who have experienced the problem tend to make a lot of noise, understandably, while for those whose cameras simply work just get on with using them and many won't go anywhere near an internet photography forum to report their experience.

Pentax could give a minimum number, but not all cases would be reported. All we know, aperture block and SDM, is that the volume of anecdotal evidence indicates that there is a definite problem with the design of the camera or components.