Mon 11-Feb-13 06:49 AM | edited Mon 11-Feb-13 10:24 PM by km6xz
How is the analogy misleading? Both have the same warranty provisions and exclusions, both are exposed to the same atmospheric particulate matter(or you also claiming that cameras are sealed and that most lenses to not pump air into and out of the mirror box?), both are made of materials that have almost identical resistance to scratches due to the same hardness value of 5.5 MoHs, and both are expensive to replace if badly or abusively handled and neither has a history of being damaged by cleaning. Cleaning is NOT deemed to be self service. If access to the sensor was not permitted and consider user maintained, by law they would have to make inaccessible under consumer law. Point and shoot cameras do have non-user maintained sensor. Is this your first venture into the realm of consumer warranty? Before making claims that are not going to be supported by evidence or the written and published warranty contract, you should have more weight behind your claims than an old blog post from an era when few people knew what AA filters were made of, when CCD sensors were the state of the art. We know better now and that same person would have not made the same statements now.
For someone who does not even identify themselves, or have a posting history, you are asking us to accept what you say that contradicts everything we have come to learn, deduce from logic and common, traditional practice. As the old saying goes in science, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".