Digital camera reliability?

[idb]

I am the happy owner of a Pentax K200D which is now 18 months old. As you can see at the bottom of all my posts I am also the owner of several old Minolta 35 mm bodies, the youngest of which is probably 15-20 years old. They all still work quite well.

My question is, can we reasonably expect our DSLRs to last as long as 35mm bodies?
I realize that the answer depends, in part, on how much use you make of a camera and how roughly it is treated.

I would also be interested to hear anybody's horror stories about brands that just don't last.

Thanks.

Ian

[junglebear]

I don't think digital cameras will last anywhere near as long as traditional mechanical cameras, simply because electrical parts have a much stronger tendency to break or be affected by environmental factors like dust, sand, water etc.

Also technology nowadays isn't designed to last, some of it is even designed to break after a couple of years (see Playstation 3, Xbox 360 and the original iPod).

[Jim Bryant]

I just had a MKII shutter go out during Sunday's Angels vs. Mariners game. I done know if they are as durable as the EOS film models, but I always shoot in the high shutter speeds from 2000 to 8000 a second, depending on the lighting conditions with rapid bursts (6-8 frames a second), so I guess I got my money's worth from the amount of pictures I've sold with it. All I know it's going to cost about $600.00 to replace the shutter assembly.

[OsmosisStudios]

My Nikon FE is from 1978.
That's 32 years.

I sincerely doubt my D80 will last me till me 50s.

[Jim Bryant]

I have four of the old, black & brass mechanical Canon F-1's that are still take pictures. I picked these up in the early to late 70's. They still work

[Murtasma]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

All I know it's going to cost about $600.00 to replace the shutter assembly.

LOL that's more then most people's DSLR bodies here.

[BCampbell]

Originally Posted by idb

My question is, can we reasonably expect our DSLRs to last as long as 35mm bodies?
I realize that the answer depends, in part, on how much use you make of a camera and how roughly it is treated.

Right. Leave a camera in the box and sure you can unwrap it thirty years from now and it'll probably work.

No, today's digitals will probably not age as well as many 35mm bodies, for several reasons -- yes because electronics are more sensitive, but also because of the marketing concept of "planned obsolescense" and other factors.

Then again, these days we mainly only see the older cameras that have survived; it's easy to assume that they were tanks when we don't see the ones in landfills.

All that said, digital cameras and DSLRs especially are tougher than a lot of people think. I'm still clicking away with a 300D that's closing in on ten years old very quickly. Sure I cross my fingers often, but it hasn't complained yet. Higher-end bodies are even more resilient. I wouldn't worry too much.

[Jim Bryant]

Originally Posted by Murtasma

LOL that's more then most people's DSLR bodies here.

I like the older MK II's for photojournalism and sports, they are built rugged and can take the punishment. The new models ranging from the MK III's to MK IV's and above are basically a piece of crap. They don't focus nearly as quick or keep tracing as the MK II's or, even the EOS 1D's. As for the MK 2 5D's and the newer model's, they still aren't built to take the punishment like the older models. As for shooting video..who care's...it's just another function to break on the camera.

[inkista]

I really don't think dSLRs are going to still be working quite as long as older film cameras are, simply because of the sensor/digital technology. Sensors go bad. When film goes bad, you just load another roll.

Once SLRs went digital, they entered the realm of computer hardware. And then, not only do things break more often or go the way of the dodo, the whole modern mindthink of obsolescence comes into play--pushed along by Moore's Law.

In addition to that, the "damped" shutter that's being used on mid-tier dSLRs comes at the cost of a more complex and delicate shutterbox mechanism. The Canon 40D repair reports were rife with a higher-than-average shutterbox failure when it was introduced. There are LCD overlays in viewfinders. There are LCD screens on the back of the camera. These are all all infinitely more complex and fragile components than most of the components on an old manual film SLR.

And, of course, you can't shoot without a working battery/power source. If those batteries go obsolete, it's not going to be like the older film camera scenario where you just have to meter some other way--the entire camera is going to be nonfunctional. It's like notebook computers or iPads--they're really cool as long as you can power them. But once the battery's flat and you don't have the charger with you--you just have a high-tech brick.

[Jim Bryant]

I think that's the reason why I still have over 500 rolls of color neg film of various ISO's still stored in my freezer. Who knows what the future will being and when we are without power I still want to be able to take pictures