eye-watering water-damage repair cost for K5+18-135mm


CMW

Link Posted 06/08/2013 - 10:02
But I do think that with a marketing statement is as strong as that quoted earlier in the thread, the warranty should live up to it ... or the marketing claim should be qualified. They are out of kilter, and in my mind I have little doubt that the marketing message has become too exuberant, offering an implicit guarantee that would probably horrify the Pentax engineers.
Regards, Christopher

ChristopherWheelerPhotography

johnriley

Link Posted 06/08/2013 - 10:09
People vary very much in the way they handle things, from the bash-the-stuff brigade who think dents and missing paint are a sign of professionalism to the I don't like to take the DSLR out in case it gets scratched brigade.

By and large though it pays to look after equipment carefully but not excessively.

The rain issue is interesting, but I'll continue to operate in the harshest conditions, albeit it with a degree of care. There's no point in having weather-resistant cameras and lenses if we're afraid to use them.
Best regards, John

froeschle

Link Posted 06/08/2013 - 10:38
Quote:
[...] marketing statement is as strong as that quoted earlier in the thread, the warranty should live up to it [...]

Just e.g. google "water damage camera covered by warranty" (irrespective of manufacturer).
A very recent example: http://www.sammobile.com/2013/07/31/water-damage-not-covered-in-galaxy-s4-active... (even with IP classification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code )

MrB

Link Posted 06/08/2013 - 11:09
Evel79 wrote:

Retracting the lens if slightly damp you hear the sound of air pushing past water - the air in the lens has to go somewhere when the volume decreases! It was at this point I took off the lens before extending to dry off again - for fear of water being somehow sucked in.

bearing in mind johns info on the lens, although the lens may remain at risk of water getting in the barrel, surely the seals should prevent any moisture getting to the inner workings of the camera itself.

The experience you describe here, Ian, would be evidence for what I was suggesting in my previous post above. And if water can be sucked in through the lens seals, and the zoom continues to be used, changing the pressure inside the camera and lens, it would seem inevitable that water will be forced past the internal seals also.

Philip

Evel79

Link Posted 06/08/2013 - 19:39



Not comparing these guys, but just a thought. Pros with Pro cameras (no doubt a good few waterproof combos in there), the majority wrapping up their cameras anyway. Paranoia, or a distrust of the claims of Canon et al.? I believe I had the K5 + 18-135 combo for this in the rain again - no problems.

Oh and froeschle you mention comparing waterproof and weather-resistant. But "weatherproof" as Pentax claims in the promo video I linked - certainly implies something more than "resistant". Taking all marketing with a pinch of salt, this could be very misleading.

I have a water-resistant and a waterproof jacket. I expect to stay dry with a waterproof jacket. I expect to be protected as I run for the train in a water-reistant one, I don't expect to stay dry if I have to stand an hour in pouring rain.

Under English law there's such a thing as misrepresentation, and should you rely upon a misrepresentation you have quite a strong case (assuming it's not seen as marketing "puff" - best beer in the world etc.) I think Pentax is sailing dangerously close to the wind here.

English case law is also littered with cases where the warranty excludes something the purchaser couldn't have known before opening the packaging and reading the warranty contained within. Generally it has been found to be void.

Not sure in Germany - but they are also very protective of consumers too. Difference is access to the courts as mentioned above. You can probably confirm this, but insurance is provided for everything here, including legal insurance. If you have that, great you can get a lawyer on it. If not, it's your own costs. Hence no small claims - since you "should" have legal insurance...Just different, but leaves a lot of people out in the cold.

tyronet2000

Link Posted 06/08/2013 - 20:04
Dear Mr Costeau,

We are sorry to inform you...
Regards
Stan

PPG

froeschle

Link Posted 07/08/2013 - 13:09
Quote:
Not comparing these guys, but just a thought. Pros with Pro cameras (no doubt a good few waterproof combos in there), the majority wrapping up their cameras anyway. Paranoia, or a distrust of the claims of Canon et al.?

I think it is not unwise to protect expensive gear, especially if you earn your living with it (see also PS below).
Quote:
Oh and froeschle you mention comparing waterproof and weather-resistant. But "weatherproof" as Pentax claims in the promo video I linked - certainly implies something more than "resistant". Taking all marketing with a pinch of salt, this could be very misleading.

It depends on the weather and I am certainly also sceptical about it (which becomes obvious if you have read the content of the above links). Especially something like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_-RAzBjakk
or this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNh3wLJydAI
is imho fully out of question/warranty. If you would officially ask Pentax they probably would warn you to do this. There is a chance that nothing is damaged ... but there is also the risk of total failure (even if this might be below 5%, you can calculate how much money a warranty like this would cost Pentax).
To cite Lothman again: http://www.dslr-forum.de/showpost.php?p=9990173&postcount=137
An official reaction where a camera was shown in a forum submerged:
Quote:
Pentax hat auch schon mitgelesen und rät dringend davon ab die Kamera einzutauchen !!!
Im Notfall kann es klappen,aber drauf verlassen lieber nicht.

Quote:
I have a water-resistant and a waterproof jacket. I expect to stay dry with a waterproof jacket. I expect to be protected as I run for the train in a water-reistant one, I don't expect to stay dry if I have to stand an hour in pouring rain.

Do you also own a water resistant watch?
Quote:
RATING: Water Resistant 3 ATM or 30 m
SUITABILITY: Suitable for everyday use. Splash/rain resistant. NOT suitable for showering, bathing, swimming, snorkelling, water related work and fishing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark
To repeat: A water resistant watch (for 3 ATM or 30 m depth) is not suitable for showering or swimming!
Quote:
Under English law there's such a thing as misrepresentation, and should you rely upon a misrepresentation you have quite a strong case (assuming it's not seen as marketing "puff" - best beer in the world etc.) I think Pentax is sailing dangerously close to the wind here.

English case law is also littered with cases where the warranty excludes something the purchaser couldn't have known before opening the packaging and reading the warranty contained within. Generally it has been found to be void.

Not sure in Germany - but they are also very protective of consumers too. Difference is access to the courts as mentioned above. You can probably confirm this, but insurance is provided for everything here, including legal insurance. If you have that, great you can get a lawyer on it. If not, it's your own costs. Hence no small claims - since you "should" have legal insurance...Just different, but leaves a lot of people out in the cold.

UK law is not applicable if you have bought the camera in Germany.
I have not yet seen a single case, where a warranty has been granted after water damage of a camera (irrespective of country).
Probably, some have been repaired on goodwill ("Kulanz").
Normally, the manufacturers reverse the burden of proof ("Beweislastumkehr").
It would help if you would have a witness that confirms that the defect occured under "normal" working conditions.

As your problem seems to be with German Pentax repair centers, you might join dfn and state your problem there.
It is a nice community, which could be of help.
There are also several members with close connections to Pentax Germany/Europe.
However, I do not really see a chance that you get a free repair.
On the other hand, this problem should be known to other customers.
A "weather-resistant" or "weatherproof" camera does not prohibit damage by water - it just makes the latter less likely to occur.
Unfortunately, your equipment was affected.



PS: Antarctica 2009: What Worked – What Didn't
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/antarctica-2009-worked.shtml
(25% failure rate of Canon 5DMk2's)

Evel79

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 07:24
Hi Froeschle,

Yes I too would be interested to see what Pentax would advise when directly asked - say in a public forum, rather than in private to one person's letter.

I certainly do have witnesses as to how it was used, it's just sad that Pentax can fall back on this without any effort. Now foolishly I gave full disclosure freely about the conditions I was using it in. A couple of the issues predated this time, and this was also made clear. Now, 4 days ago they told me it was was water damage, not covered by warranty and the repair would cost 647€. So, 4 days ago I asked for a copy of their quotation and investigation so that I would know what exactly they found. Strangely I have heard nothing since, despite chasing them up. It took them 1 day from the camera arriving with them to make their decision. My best guess is they used my letter to form their conclusions rather than actually open up the camera. I even got a holding email. It cannot be that hard to send an email with an already existing attachment...

Nokia provided a full diagnostic on a famously water-damage prone model many years ago. Although disappointed, their transparency was appreciated. They even gave me an address of a lab if I wanted to have it tested myself to dispute their findings.

The point of this thread was to vent a little, but mostly to raise an issue that might affect others on a forum I found friendly and informative in the past. I can't do this on every forum, unfortunately.

Highlighting regional differences is simply to explain why some remedies may not be available to me to the UK forum members.
Pentax's response should be universal given the international warranty card you can easily obtain. So if you're spending 3 months in Germany, your UK camera can be repaired here. Mine came with a French manual, so I suspect a French model, but that's caused no issue.

Due to a misinterpretation of EU law, Germany is great that out gives 2 years warranty on everything. Not in the UK, but you do see it sometimes. So in some ways I'm lucky I have a chance to even try for a warranty repair.

But this is more of an issue of misleading advertising and Pentax's response. Legal remedies could be discussed to the nth degree, but the question is whether we should even have to think on these terms when we just want to enjoy our cameras worry free.

johnriley

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 07:50
Just to clarify, you mention there Pentax's response and I think that it was not Pentax you have asked? Am I right in thinking that it's the local repair facility we are talking about here, so the UK equivalent would be discussing JPS?

If that's the case, probably better to wait and see how it develops with the repair house, and subsequently, should you approach them directly, how it is approached by Pentax?

It strikes me that if a repair was so expensive it would be more logical for you to be offered a replacement at cost, at the very least. That's without considering the warranty implications.

Now if it's a standard water-damage quote, it also begs the question regarding the fault. As the camera is still working and you just wanted it checked out "in case" then when opened up there might be no water leakage. But even under warranty there would presumably be a charge for this work if it was shown that actually nothing was wrong after all?
Best regards, John

Evel79

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 08:32
Hi john,

Just to clarify. Yes I'm dealing with a third party, who have been very good. They have also made it clear that the decision was the 'manufacturer's'. Although I realise of course this could also be their choice of words. But if it is an authorised repair centre, they are operating according to Pentax warranties, so ultimately they can ask Pentax if they'll pay or offer some alternative, as you suggest.

I would say intermittent fault. It stopped working completely for 2 days. Even if it seemed healthy, I think that's ground enough for a check. However, I've noticed I have a sticky mirror with all manual lenses under a certain condition, so I wanted that checked, too.

I want the breakdown so I can say fix the mirror under warranty, leave the Circuitboard, or whatever they still maintain is not covered as water damage. I'm not going to go down the legal route. It worked the day before I sent it, so I'll take the risk st that price.

The 3rd party paid for the postage, if no repairs are done I pay 40 euros to have it back. Call this postage or investigation fee, I'm happy with that so long as they have actually looked at it.

Evel79

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 08:37
I forgot to mention, I was even given the option of disposing of the camera for free.

Now that's good investigation of a camera that stemmed to be working when I sent it in!

froeschle

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 11:50
Hi Evel79,

in Germany, the repair service has been "outsourced" from Pentax under Hoya.
The corresponding partners are Rüdiger Maerz and TRITEC (see http://www.pentax.de/de/reparaturservice-kompakt.html ).
Initially, repair and response was criticised very much in comparison to the previous direct services.
Recently, at least, the reputation is quite good.
However, if you want to repair Pentax gear without warranty, cheaper and maybe better options do exist.

The choices given by the repair centre are quite common (at least in Germany):
a) pay for repair;
b) get the product back with a fee;
c) dispose the product free of charge.
Especially, if the costs are too high, c) sometimes really is an option ("wirtschaftlicher Totalschaden").
From your description, I very much doubt that there has been a direct contact with Pentax before your enquiry.
As (nearly) all manufacturers exclude water damage from their warranty, their reply rather seems to be the standard message for me.
Please note that Rüdiger Maerz is also official partner of Canon CPS - where the policy probably is strictly the same.

This is understandable, as the companies do not know what there customers have been doing with their cameras.
It might be difficult to distinguish between reasons of failure (e.g. damage by rain or by submersion under water).
This is probably the reason why they reverse the burden of proof.
Also, this is why I asked for a witness.

If you want to achieve something, you probably should contact Pentax Germany directly!
Tell them the problem, the repair centre and the repair number.
In the moment, however, many people are on holiday.
So, if e.g. the leading technician is not available for examination, things might take some time.
This could also be the reason why the response to your question has not arrived yet.

Quote:
The point of this thread was to vent a little, but mostly to raise an issue that might affect others on a forum I found friendly and informative in the past. I can't do this on every forum, unfortunately.

It is quite natural that one is disappointed about damaged gear - especially if the repair cost is eye-watering .
Nonetheless, to repeat again:
A "weather-resistant" or "weatherproof" camera does not prohibit damage by water - it just makes the latter less likely to occur.
Quote:
But this is more of an issue of misleading advertising and Pentax's response.

I fully agree with that.
Showing official promotional videos where water is poured over cameras could imply that this is an acceptable procedure.
However, knowing some details about sealings, it is quite clear that the failure rate will be above 0%.
It probably will be lower for "weather-resistant" cameras than for normal ones, but water-damage still is possible.
So, a lesson for others might be: Do not rely exclusively on the sealings of your camera.
In the border case, careless handling of equipment might even undercut the WR advantage - a well-protected camera might be less error-prone.

Regards,
froeschle

PS:
Quote:
Germany is great that out gives 2 years warranty on everything.

Be aware of the differences between "Garantie" and "Gewährleistung".
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garantie
Quote:
Garantie: ein zwischen Käufer und einem Garantiegeber abgeschlossener Vertrag, der dem Käufer eine unbedingte Schadensersatzleistung zusichert.
Gewährleistung: definiert eine zeitlich befristete Nachbesserungsverpflichtung ausschließlich für Mängel, die zum Zeitpunkt des Verkaufs bereits bestanden.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gew%C3%A4hrleistung
Quote:
Mindeststandards für die Gewährleistung beim gewerblichen Verkauf an private Endverbraucher. Insbesondere darf die Verjährungsfrist zwei Jahre ab Lieferung nicht unterschreiten und innerhalb der ersten sechs Monate muss die Beweislast in der Regel beim Verkäufer liegen. Die Gewährleistungsansprüche bestehen gegenüber dem Verkäufer, nicht dem Hersteller der Ware.

Evel79

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 12:27
Thanks froeschle,

The store just confirmed they've not heard anything more from the 'manufacturer', and have offered to put me in direct contract with them, so I'll be starting again, but at least I'll know who exactly who I'm dealing with. Think I'll copy in Pentax Germany from the outset.

I now realised what you meant by the switching of the burden of proof. That's a bit special for Germany but I've already gone down that road with a damaged car battery, so I know what you mean. In summary, it's damn hard to prove you haven't done something! And my witness is my wife...not sure how that will be seen - no actually I do!
Last Edited by Evel79 on 08/08/2013 - 12:28

McGregNi

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 13:24
johnriley wrote:
People vary very much in the way they handle things, from the bash-the-stuff brigade who think dents and missing paint are a sign of professionalism to the I don't like to take the DSLR out in case it gets scratched brigade.

I'd fall more towards the latter 'brigade' I admit. Once the camera is out then I love to use it robustly and push it technically, but physically I am naturally rather precious with all my Pentax stuff. For me its special, something to be proud of, and very careful handling just seems the natural way.

I've had the K7 + 18-55 WR out in light rain and falling snow. Even with a lens hood on I do find that the lens front element is the weak link in these conditions. But I did find it counter-intuitive to just let the moisture soak onto the gear - its such an ingrained habit to try and prevent this, very hard to stop yourself trying to cover the camera.
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver

George Lazarette

Link Posted 08/08/2013 - 19:42
I am surprised that the You-tube video used the words "weather-proof", and I doubt that Pentax were aware of it. They almost invariably use the term "weather-resistant", which is different from "weather-proof", and very different from "water-proof".

A moment's reflection will show that Pentax has to exclude water damage from the warranty as there is no way of knowing how the camera was actually used, and, sadly, people are prone to lie about issues like this.

As it is, I think the OP was pushing the boundaries a bit, even if he didn't actually drop the camera in the bath. And I fully take MrB's point about the impracticability of weather-proofing a zoom.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Last Edited by George Lazarette on 08/08/2013 - 19:42
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.