Using FujiFilm SDK on a Camera Voids Its Warranty

I am an amateur photographer, and I can&#x27;t understand why the major camera brands (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc.) aren&#x27;t open at least to the concept of SDK&#x27;s to control their cameras (let alone opening the lens mount specifications)...<p>It would make their cameras much more flexible and useful, thus perhaps gaining some users that currently use smartphones where it seems there is greater control over and integration with the cameras. On the other side, if one can implement in software what the producer doesn&#x27;t want to implement in firmware, they might miss some future upgrade sales...<p>I am currently thinking on buying a FujiFilm X-T4, and I was pleased to see there is a SDK, but now, finding out that using the SDK is practically forbidden (until the warranty ends), it makes me stop and think about my decision... What could the SDK do to the camera so that it voids the warranty? (On the other hand, given the quality of camera brand produced software, I can imagine the quality of the code that went into it...) :)

&gt; Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Fujifilm hereby grants to you a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and royalty-free license to;<p>(a) use, <i>modify</i> and make a limited number of copies of the SDK solely for the purpose of the Development;<p>Later in the same agreement...<p>&gt; 3.5 You shall not (and shall not permit others), to reverse engineer, reverse compile, or disassemble the SDK in any way(in whole or in part); and you shall not (and shall not permit others) to use any method to trace, decompile, or disassemble the SDK.<p>So, which one is it?

This is illegal in the US due to the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act.<p>They can only void the warrenty if they can prove that the damage is the result of the SDK usage.

&gt; 5.2 YOU AGREE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, ONCE A PRODUCT IS USED OR CONTROLLED BY OR THROUGH THE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM, SUCH PRODUCT SHALL BE OUT OF SUCH MANUFACTURER-WARRANTY WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCT AS SEPARATELY SPECIFIED BY FUJIFILM, FUJIFILM’S AFFILIATES, OR THEIR BUSINESS PARTNERS.<p>Brutal. Consumer protections are lagging badly behind in the software era. It&#x27;s bad enough that commercial software has broad disclaimers against ensuring any kind of functionality, but this stuff is starting to creep into hardware too. I think right-to-repair is a good start.

This SDK only works on the top end Fuji&#x27;s, the cheapest one supported starts at £850 (body only)<p>Fuji has famously terrible app support, its a nightmare to set up and cuts out constantly, transferring images over wifi is slow and unreliable to the point of it being useless, the remote shutter is unreliable and doesnt have any of the extremely simple to program features that intervalometer&#x27;s have. You can&#x27;t shoot tethered unless you have one of the above very expensive cameras.<p>The whole software ecosystem around cameras is awful, I would love to see some open source community initiatives to be able to control these cameras and extend their functionality but I haven&#x27;t seen much of that in the photography community.

The text (at bottom, outside of the block):<p>&quot;AS STARTED ABOVE, USING THIS SDK TO CONNECT TO OR CONTROL, ANY COMPATIBLE FUJIFILM CAMERA WILL VOID THE CAMERA’S LIMITED PRODUCT WARRANTY.&quot;<p>I&#x27;m sure the FTC would like to have a word, about revoking a warranty by using intended software.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cascable.se&#x2F;ios&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cascable.se&#x2F;ios&#x2F;</a><p>For those looking to use something in between some of the horrible official camera apps and implementing something with this SDK, Cascable is really quite nice. I find it well worth the subscription.<p>Before the official SDK came out, I tried using this project that was working on reverse engineering the protocol for Fuji cameras:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;hkr&#x2F;fuji-cam-wifi-tool" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;hkr&#x2F;fuji-cam-wifi-tool</a><p>Alas, I’m working with an X-T2 and it is not supported by the official SDK.

Kind of surprising to see Fujifilm do this.<p>On the flip side, it suggests that there are probably some interesting things that are possible with the SDK.

Camera manufacturers really seem to try to shoot themselves in the foot as much as possible. They are putting on something interesting and immediately kill it for braid use. Nobody is going to publish software based on the SDK. At least nobody who doesn’t want the threat of lawsuits hanging over them.

I, for one, can forgive FujiFilm... because, even though recently finally discontinued, they gave us FujiChrome Velvia 100 (&amp; 50).

It would be great to have on Fuji cameras something like Magic Lantern on Canon&#x27;s. Technically camera HW is capable of much more than manufacturer allow to do with software.<p>They usually support cameras with updates for 2 years and and then nothing. I understand that it is more profitable to make new cameras but it is not sustainable and eventually all consumer camera manufacturer will have to change their approach, because this industry slowly dying in consumer area. And it is not necessary because of smartphones but also because cameras since circa 2014 are good enough to keep them until die, not to switch every year.<p>I&#x27;m using Fuji cameras for pro work over 5 years now and I still mostly use X-T2 and x100F. Those are most reliable cameras I have. Very solid construction, &quot;made in Japan&quot;. X-T3 feels very plasticky. Same for X-T4.

I have an XE 4 and I also investigated the possibility but they don&#x27;t even provide headers for all the models. I would have to buy one of the few supported models to be able to play with the SDK.<p>They are missing a big oportunity and whoever wakes up first may get a nice boost from computational photography afficionados as well as many specialized fields.<p>I understand that they are trying to save development time by not building the necessary safeguards and I wish they published some less invasive way to communicate with the cameras such as over bluetooth or Wifi which many cameras already support.

An interesting question here is: How would they know that you used the SDK?<p>Does the camera have non-volatile memory for saving that piece of info? Assuming that it does, how can they make that bit tamper-proof?<p>Not that tamper-proofing is undoable, but it would require a lot of expensive engineering, just to save them from replacing a few dozens of cameras that presumably may break because of incorrect use of the SDK.

also interesting is the following clause<p>&gt; 5.3 BEFORE SELLING, LICENSING, PROVIDING OR DISTRIBUTING THE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM TO YOUR CUSTOMER (IF ANY), YOU SHALL EXPLAIN AND MAKE SUCH CUSTOMER FULLY UNDERSTAND THE WARRANTY-EXCEPTION SET FORTH IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPH.<p>this is a b2b2c term -- we need better tech for capturing consent up the chain and for surfacing contract terms to downstream clients<p>(notwithstanding the fact that in this case, it&#x27;s 65% bullshit that the warranty is voided and 110% bullshit that fuji expects downstream consent to be captured)

I have a Fujifilm XPro3. My favorite camera of all time. But I would trade it in for a camera with equivalent specs that runs a proper operating system and supports app development.<p>Cameras are so far behind smartphones in terms of their software that it has become embarrassing. Paying $2000+ for a camera, only to find out your smartphone does a better job of autofocusing and handling noise is just annoying.

I suppose they have to demonstrate that the error you get derived from the use of the SDK.

Some android phones unlock bootloader also voids warranty.

That&#x27;s certainly illegal here.

What&#x27;s strange about that? It&#x27;s no different from losing support entitlement if you screw around with a phone SDK and brick your phone.<p>But another camera if you don&#x27;t like it.