Voiding warranty - what other surprises are there besides Global Media batteries?

[Les C.]

I noticed one post where it was mentioned RED warned a customer his warranty could be voided due to using Global Media batteries.

In another post, a RED user said he was charged over a thousand for a repair involving for using 3rd party accessories, as they invalidated his warranty.

I notice a lot of people using AB and Global Media batteries on the Epic and Scarlet forums, both seem well regarded.

But, I've got some concerns now about how 3rd party accessories affect the warranty.

Are there other things that will void warranty that seem to be commonly done?

There was some initial confusion on my part about the 2nd post being about GMP batteries. It turned out I was mistaken, and the invalidated warranty was due to some other 3rd party power accessories.

So, the title of this thread may be misleading as to whether or not there are issues specifically with GMP batteries. I've never heard of any user complaints, so ... I'm not aware of any.

There's some clarification by RED on several posts in this thread that basically seem to say, if a 3rd party accessory damages the camera, your warranty is void. Fair enough. (BTW - the main problems reported by RED have to do with 3rd party power and audio - with audio being exceedingly problematic, often mis-wired. FYI - Do NOT plug your line level into the mic input - and with the phantom power getting enabled soon, be dead certain your audio wiring is correct, or be dead)

But, there's still some confusion as to whether just using a 3rd party accessory, one that is not defective, will void one's warranty.

I'm sure this will get cleared up shortly, and I'll probably edit this initial post again.

 

[Adam Michael Carr]

Are you saying that both GM and AB batteries will void the warranty? I was unaware that using AB batteries would void my warranty. Where is this stated?

 

[Dave Weber]

Les,

I know there is a thread out there where Jarred states that using aluminium screws to hold parts onto your camera could void the warranty also. from Jarred directly;

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?60780-EPIC-Module-Cover&p=788642#post788642

 

[Les C.]

Are you saying that both GM and AB batteries will void the warranty? I was unaware that using AB batteries would void my warranty. Where is this stated?

I do not know if that's the case. The threads I saw where for GMP. AB is not a RED product, so it could very well void the warranty.

I'm just trying to find out the answer?

 

[Jeff Whitehurst]

Check out the "Warranty Limitations" section here: http://www.red.com/terms-conditions
Improper electrical/power supply, defective batteries and non-RED Approved lens mounts are some of the standout items mentioned.

 

[Les C.]

Check out the "Warranty Limitations" section here: http://www.red.com/terms-conditions
Improper electrical/power supply, defective batteries and non-RED Approved lens mounts are some of the standout items mentioned.

Well, there's a line the the terms and conditions:

"Red products are compatible with Red software, Red parts, and Red products only. Use of any software, parts, or products other than Red or Red approved software, parts, and products voids any and all warranties."

that could imply using a Canon lens with the Canon mount would invalidate the warranty. That line was written by a lawyer to be a broad as possible.

That would certainly apply to AB batteries, and to every single non-RED product out there.

This one thread that stuck out to me involved a user who had an issue, RED agreed that it was not is fault (heresay, as I was not there), and when he told them that he was using GMP, it cost him > $1K to get his camera back.

Under that warranty language, GMP or AB batteries, or tvLogic or Marshall monitors, can void your warranty.

I find that a bit disturbing - especially that connecting a DC power source would void the warranty and cost that gentleman a lot of money.

I don't own any GMP batteries, and only know what I read here, but if they are defective products that will void the warranty, RED should probably mention that, as there are a whole lot of people who own them and my perception is that they are well regarded.

I certainly want to avoid the situation where I have my warranty voided for using a well regarded product.

 

[Jesper Sichlau]

Well, there's a line the the terms and conditions:

"Red products are compatible with Red software, Red parts, and Red products only. Use of any software, parts, or products other than Red or Red approved software, parts, and products voids any and all warranties."

that could imply using a Canon lens with the Canon mount would invalidate the warranty. That line was written by a lawyer to be a broad as possible.

If a lens works with the Red (i.e. focus, zoom?, aperture) it must be by definition been approved for the camera. Othervise it simply wouldn't work.

 

[Scott Crawley]

If a lens works with the Red (i.e. focus, zoom?, aperture) it must be by definition been approved for the camera. Othervise it simply wouldn't work.

I wouldn't quite go that far myself. I wouldn't say that Red warrants the use of all EF mount lenses with their camera systems. They only warrant the things that are expressly stated in the warranty documents. You can infer anything else you like, but they will not back you up on it.

Some lenses that have not yet been profiled or tested may still work with the system. The fact that they work does not mean that they are approved or supported, much less warranted.

 

[Adam Michael Carr]

Well, there's a line the the terms and conditions:

"Red products are compatible with Red software, Red parts, and Red products only. Use of any software, parts, or products other than Red or Red approved software, parts, and products voids any and all warranties."

that could imply using a Canon lens with the Canon mount would invalidate the warranty. That line was written by a lawyer to be a broad as possible.

That would certainly apply to AB batteries, and to every single non-RED product out there.

This one thread that stuck out to me involved a user who had an issue, RED agreed that it was not is fault (heresay, as I was not there), and when he told them that he was using GMP, it cost him > $1K to get his camera back.

Under that warranty language, GMP or AB batteries, or tvLogic or Marshall monitors, can void your warranty.

I find that a bit disturbing - especially that connecting a DC power source would void the warranty and cost that gentleman a lot of money.

I don't own any GMP batteries, and only know what I read here, but if they are defective products that will void the warranty, RED should probably mention that, as there are a whole lot of people who own them and my perception is that they are well regarded.

I certainly want to avoid the situation where I have my warranty voided for using a well regarded product.

Are we talking about the factory warranty or the extended Red Armor warranty? So when it comes to these 3rd party accessories, even the Armor cant protect us?

 

[Scott C]

I would love some clarification on this subject.. if everyone who is using a GMP or other aftermarket battery has voided their warranty that will affect a large number of people.

 

[Scott Crawley]

The warranty does not say that using a particular brand will be cause to void, but any defective power source. Isn't that right?

 

[Les C.]

The warranty does not say that using a particular brand will be cause to void, but any defective power source. Isn't that right?

Scott - I've seen two posts in the last week where they said RED told them using GMP would void their warranty. One guy had to pay about $1400 (from memory) to get his RED back after he told them that he was using GMP (before that, they said it was not his problem). There was no mention that the GMP batteries were defective in any way.

But, check out my post here: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...edia-batteries&p=995235&viewfull=1#post995235

for the language they use. It can mean anything they want it to mean (my Dad was a Yale lawyer, I got a lot of law growing up), and if they are voiding warranty due to GMP batteries, I'm really wondering what other 3rd party devices they will also void warranty for?

 

[Scott Crawley]

Hmmm, I guess they don't want another Birger situation on their hands.

 

[Mondo Ghulam]

Is there a 'safe' list of approved 3rd party products posted anywhere?

 

[Erik Widding]

Hmmm, I guess they don't want another Birger situation on their hands.

I assume by "Birger situation" you mean a popular third party accessory, that once in production, never caused damage to a single camera... (If you meant something else, you should check your facts, before continuing to spread an urban legend...)

 

[Scott Crawley]

I assume by "Birger situation" you mean a popular third party accessory, that once in production, never caused damage to a single camera... (If you meant something else, you should check your facts, before continuing to spread an urban legend...)

Nobody ever damaged a wire or other component while installing or removing a Birger mount? Did nobody ever have to send their Red One in for service as a result of the attempted installation of the mount? Did Red never do a warranty repair or service on a Red One that had the mount installed? Is that what you are saying?

 

[Erik Widding]

Nobody ever damaged a wire while installing or removing a Birger mount? Is that what you are saying?

Not what I am saying at all. The product was not the cause of such damage, any more than the Red-one Nikon mount (sold by red) was responsible for the same sort of damage.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Not what I am saying at all. The product was not the cause of such damage, any more than the Red-one Nikon mount (sold by red) was responsible for the same sort of damage.

Nor did I say that it was. It was however the installation of a third party accessory that caused the problem. It was a problem that Red no doubt seeks to avoid. I speculate those incidents had a direct bearing on the current terms of the warranty.

Since you mention it though, one could argue that many of those damages would never have happened in the first place were it not for the existence of the mount. Therefore the mount was at least indirectly responsible for the damage.

I would further speculate that experiences like those played a significant part in the modular designs of Epic. Change the Epic's mount or side handle and let me know if there are any dangling wires to screw down, bend or pull on during the procedure. ;-)

EDIT:
I mean no harm to the manufacturer of the mount mind you. When I heard of It I was salivating for one. It would have been the deciding factor for me to buy a Red One. When it was disavowed, so to speak, I was crushed, and put off my Red purchase until something came along to replace it. I waited three years. It was that important to me. The mount is the balls.

 

[Erik Widding]

Nor did I say that it was... Since you mention it though... I would further speculate...

I don't need to speculate. I was intimately involved. I politely pointed out that you did not have your facts straight. I am also going to politely point out that you added to your initial post after it had been quoted in its entirety. Kind of makes the conversation look different than it really went down... The whole of this is an open secret, you might find that you draw a different conclusion once you do a little digging. Might be educational. BTW, this is about all I am going to invest in this...

 

[Scott Crawley]

I don't need to speculate. I was intimately involved. I politely pointed out that you did not have your facts straight. I am also going to politely point out that you added to your initial post after it had been quoted in its entirety. Kind of makes the conversation look different than it really went down... The whole of this is an open secret, you might find that you draw a different conclusion once you do a little digging. Might be educational. BTW, this is about all I am going to invest in this...

I do edit a lot. Sorry if that causes you a problem. I understand your concerns. For the record, I ammended my post further to extoll the virtue of the mount before reading your response. Edits are also there in the record for those who would like to read them.

I think my facts and I are OK. If not please feel free to berate me publicly.