Canon have a history of over promising and under delivering. The camera's never delivered what the marketing boasted. However a class action will no get anywhere in Japan because of their laws. In the US you can sue Canon USA subsidiary but that often gets nowhere either because they hide everything in the fine print.
I remember back in the late 2000's canon screwed up the AF with the 1D Mark III camera, it was literally a piece of junk, they did 5-6 recalls, hardware fixes and FW updates, it never got fixed but they never acknowledged officially there was a problem at first place. Law suits were filed but unsuccessful because defendant argued "they never disclosed what percentage of images would be in focus" even if only 1 out of 100 images were in focus that was enough for them to argue the camera had "the most advanced auto focus system". they didn't say compared to what another e.g. they have been using the phrase AI in their crude AF systems as early as the late 90's however this is a blatant BS as the cameras never had any machine learning or AI capability in true sense until this year and even that's not clear if it is real ML or a rigid algo but they got away with it.
maybe if the heating results in fire and loss of property there will be a successful suit but I doubt it.
Canon have a history of over promising and under delivering. The camera's never delivered what the marketing boasted. However a class action will no get anywhere in Japan because of their laws. In the US you can sue Canon USA subsidiary but that often gets nowhere either because they hide everything in the fine print.
I remember back in the late 2000's canon screwed up the AF with the 1D Mark III camera, it was literally a piece of junk, they did 5-6 recalls, hardware fixes and FW updates, it never got fixed but they never acknowledged officially there was a problem at first place. Law suits were filed but unsuccessful because defendant argued "they never disclosed what percentage of images would be in focus" eve if only 1 out of 100 images were in focus that was enough for them to argue the camera had "the most advanced auto focus system". they didn't say compared to what another e.g. they have been using the phrase AI in their crude AF systems as early as the late 90's however this is a blatant BS as the cameras never had any machine learning or AI capability in true sense until this year and even that's not clear if it is real ML or a rigid algo but they got away with it.
maybe if the heating results in fire and loss of property there will be a successful suit but I doubt it.
Canon have a history of over promising and under delivering. The camera's never delivered what the marketing boasted. However a class action will no get anywhere in Japan because of their laws. In the US you can sue Canon USA subsidiary but that often gets nowhere either because they hide everything in the fine print.
I remember back in the late 2000's canon screwed up the AF with the 1D Mark III camera, it was literally a piece of junk, they did 5-6 recalls, hardware fixes and FW updates, it never got fixed but they never acknowledged officially there was a problem at first place. Law suits were filed but unsuccessful because defendant argued "they never disclosed what percentage of images would be in focus" eve if only 1 out of 100 images were in focus that was enough for them to argue the camera had "the most advanced auto focus system". they didn't say compared to what another e.g. they have been using the phrase AI in their crude AF systems as early as the late 90's however this is a blatant BS as the cameras never had any machine learning or AI capability in true sense until this year but they got away with it.
maybe if the heating results in fire and loss of property there will be a successful suit but I doubt it.
Canon have a history of over promising and under delivering. The camera's never delivered what the marketing boasted. However a class action will no get anywhere in Japan because of their laws. In the US you can sue Canon USA subsidiary but that often gets nowhere either because they hide everything in the fine print.
I remember back in the late 2000's canon screwed up the AF with the 1D Mark III camera, it was literally a piece of junk, they did 5-6 recalls, hardware fixes and FW updates, it never got fixed but they never acknowledged officially there was a problem at first place. Law suits were filed but unsuccessful because defendant argued "they never disclosed what percentage of images would be in focus" eve if only 1 out of 100 images were in focus that was enough for them to argue the camera had "the most advanced auto focus system". Did they didn't say compared to what another e.g. they have been using the phrase AI in their crude AF systems as early as the late 90's however this is a blatant BS as the cameras never had any machine learning or AI capability in true sense until this year but they got away with it.
maybe if the heating results in fire and loss of property there will be a successful suit but I doubt it.
Canon have a history of over promising and under delivering. The camera's never delivered what the marketing boasted. However a class action will no get anywhere in Japan because of their laws. In the US you can sue Canon USA subsidiary but that often gets no where either because they hide everything in the fine print. I remember back in the late 2000's canon screwed up the AF with the 1D Mark III camera, it was a piece of junk, they did 5-6 recalls and updates, never got fixed but they never acknowledged officially there was a problem at first place. law suits were filed but unsuccessful because defendant argued "they never disclosed what percentage of images would be in focus" eve if only 1 out of 100 images were in focus that was enough for them to argue the camera had "the most advanced auto focus system". did they didn't say compared to what and how many
Jul 26, 2020 at 02:15 AM
Previous versions of speedmaster20d's message #15294864 « Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6 »
another e.g. they have been using the phrase AI in their crude AF systems as early as the late 90's however this is a blatant BS as the cameras never had any machine learning or AI capability in true sense until this year and even that's not clear if it is real ML or a rigid algo but they got away with it.