Camera Design Life

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Tony B, May 29, 2008.

  1. Tony B

    Tony B Guest

    I've recently got an old Russian film camera in order to have a play
    with BW film. This has got me thinking now, how long do you reckon my
    D40 will last? Will it still be taking photos thirty years from now, or
    will it be junk? How long do digital cameras last before they are broken
    beyond economic repair? So far, this has not been an issue as my digital
    cameras have got better and better over the last ten or so years, as
    they broke or got dirty inside I've just got a newer, cheaper better one
    but with the D40 there really is no reason to go "better" other than the
    inner warmth of having a New Thing.

    So, design life = ???

    T
     
    Tony B, May 29, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony B

    Frank Arthur Guest

    Possibly as long as 5 years at the rate of electronics progress go.
    They will far outlast their ability to meet fast changing technology.
    Are you kidding? Where are the $2000 Nikon D100's?
    Where are the $8,000 D1's? How many would want a D70?
     
    Frank Arthur, May 29, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tony B

    The One Guest

    Worrying times ahead I feel. Sadly cameras will get more and more advanced
    and hardware / software embedded in them will take away the creativity from
    the user. Fujis are getting there with the HDR rendition in camera. Soon
    cameras will process images in camera to how they should be rather than what
    the user wants. Also active compostion control will mean the camera will
    take a photo automatically once the composition is right, finally the user
    will be operating the camera, rather than the camera being under total
    control by the user. One day you will be able to place a camera on a tripod
    and it will scan the scene for the best compostion. Either that or complete
    computer generated perfect scenes indistigushable from the real thing. Of
    course the user will claim recognision for 'pressing the button'.

    Already digital has faded proper photography into obscurity, running a photo
    through a HDR program and then saying its all your own work is merely the
    start of the slippery slope into the death of photography as we know it.

    The one thing which worries me more is the fact that the affordability and
    ease of digital photography means that peoples images are more liable to be
    ripped of by lazy third party photographers. I have seen this numerous times
    lately. A seasoned local pro updates his website with a unique local
    photograph which is likely to sell numerous prints is welcomed by the other
    no-hoper local amatures / novices copying the same image, composition for
    their own sale. This I simply hate and can point you to many individual
    websites doing just that... ripping off professionals work. I call this
    photo 'phishing'.
     
    The One, May 29, 2008
    #3
  4. Tony B

    Wilson Guest

    I saw a D200 for sale a few weeks ago, advertised as like new with only
    8,500 some odd shutter activations. I still use a D70 that I've had since
    new that has almost 5,000 shutter activations. I has operated flawlessly
    and works exactly the way it did when new. It seems to me technology not
    mechanical breakdown will more likely be the cause of obsolescence. We
    shouldn't fall for the false obsolescence suggested by the advertisers of
    the latest and greatest new thing. Someone in this thread asked why anyone
    would want a D70. I would have no problem answering that question. It's a
    good camera.
     
    Wilson, May 29, 2008
    #4
  5. Tony B

    ray Guest

    FWIW - my old 1mp Kodak DC210+ is still working fine. I believe I've had
    it for close to 10 years now.
     
    ray, May 29, 2008
    #5
  6. Tony B

    Frank Arthur Guest

    I'm the one. What I said, exactly, was "How many would want a D70?".
    The D70 is a fine camera and probably could take many years of fine
    pictures.
    Most buyers, however, prefer to buy a later model camera and this is
    clearly reflected in the selling price of the D70. For the same price
    you paid for your 6 mp camera one could buy a 10 mp body with many
    other significant improvements. In general D200 camera owners (a
    camera less than 2 years old) are dumping them in favor of a D300.
    Another poster said he enjoys his 10 year old 1 mp camera. I don't
    think you would even consider a 1 mp Digital camera. Would you?
     
    Frank Arthur, May 29, 2008
    #6
  7. Tony B

    Peter Guest

    You have confused me.
    Please explain your points.
    Perhaps we better understand if you directly answer each of my questions,
    below?


    What is the difference between what the user wants and how the picture
    "should be?"
    Are you complaining that an engineer will dictate art?
    Exactly what is the "best composition?"
    Who makes that determination?
    Are you saying that we should hold back technology because it is misused?
     
    Peter, May 30, 2008
    #7
  8. Tony B

    Wilson Guest

    I'm not an expert on this by any means, but I don't worship at the megapixel
    alter. From what I've seen doubling the megapixels on the D70, D50, D40,
    etc. sized sensor doesn't give enough more photographic quality to make buy
    one of the new cameras. But you are right about one thing, the hype on the
    D300 is making people dump their D200's at fire sale prices so they can get
    hands on the highly acclaimed D300. If I can get a real deal on a D200 I
    just might go for it and give my D70 to my girl friend (if she'll take it).
    The D200 has stood the test of time. It will think this would be an
    excellent use of my economy stimulus money.

    I still have my first digital camera around somewhere, a little Kodak with 0
    megapixels. It doesn't have much to offer. I bought a 2.1 megapixel Nikon
    950 at an estate sale and had it converted to an infrared camera. I've
    gotten sharp 11x14 prints from it. I've read about Canon's original DSLR
    that I think was 2 megapixels. The guy that owned it uses it for web work
    and you can't tell the difference on the web from it and a 12 megapixel
    camera. So a lot depends on the intended use.
     
    Wilson, May 30, 2008
    #8
  9. Tony B

    PDM Guest

    Oh dear! I'm still using my Pentax Spotmatics bought in 1970. Never ever
    bothered to upgrade until digital started to get good. Got used to the
    camera and noticed by the time some photographers using modern cameras had
    found the on switch I had already taken a dozen pictures. Now I'm using a
    D40x and guess that I will probably not bother upgrading for a very long
    time. The technology would have to improve significantly though.

    PDM
     
    PDM, May 30, 2008
    #9
  10. Tony B

    Tony B Guest

    Lots of interesting contributions to this thread, but I'm still none the
    wiser as to how long I can expect my d40 to last, i.e. before it breaks,
    not before it becomes obsolete due to newer equipment.. I guess it was
    pretty much obsolete when I bought it earlier this year!! But I'm not in
    the market for the latest/greatest, with my modest Nikon I have a dSLR
    that takes great pictures, well up to the biggest prints I produce and
    has enough features for me to spend many, many more hours learning to
    make the pictures I want. The question I was trying to frame was, how
    long will it be functional? As I say, I recently got a forty year old
    Russian rangefinder for BW and it makes great pictures. Will my D40
    still be able to do that in 40 years???

    T
     
    Tony B, May 30, 2008
    #10
  11. Tony B

    Peter Guest


    AFAIK a good rule of thumb is to take the manufacturers rated life and
    double it.
     
    Peter, May 30, 2008
    #11
  12. Tony B

    Wilson Guest

    There's obsolete and then there's true obsolescence. As a practical matter
    will you be able to get a battery to power the camera 40 years from now? I
    doubt it. Will you be able to find anything that can read the memory media
    40 years now? I think not. That's real obsolescence. Technology will have
    left all this stuff unusable long before then.

    Anyone out there using a Sony Mavica digital camera with the floppy disk
    drive these days?
     
    Wilson, May 30, 2008
    #12
  13. Tony B

    Savant Guest

    Most of them have an estimated shutter cycle amount. I have the Canon
    MarK II DS and I think it has 100K or 200K shots and
    then ????????????????????
    I figure by then there will be something else I will want anyway but
    you are right-the old ones take a lickin' and keep on tickin'
    Best regards

    http://www.brucekersten.com
    http://www.savantcreative.com
     
    Savant, May 30, 2008
    #13
  14. Tony B

    ransley Guest

    The shutter has a life I am guessing 100,000 shots, then you can fix
    it, why shouldnt it last 20-40 years, someday a component will fail
    and it will be to expensive or the part wont be made anymore to fix it
     
    ransley, May 30, 2008
    #14
  15. It's just about exactly the same with the D40 as it was
    with the Russian rangefinder. If you work it to death,
    the shutter mechanism will fail. If you shoot a half a
    dozen pictures a week, you'll never get there, and the
    camera will still be working in 40 years. If you hand
    it to a pro that takes 400 images a day, every working
    day...

    In fact the D40 shutter will probably last for at least
    twice as many actuations as any camera that was made 40
    years ago.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, May 30, 2008
    #15
  16. Tony B

    ray Guest

    Point being that a (digital) camera is not truly obsolete until it dies or
    you give up on it. BTW - I'm now primarily using a P850 - but I did use
    the DC210+ for shooting haloween photos at the local library last year.
    They simply wanted to be able to print out small pictures of the folks in
    costume - no need for multi megapixels since the pics were done 12 to a
    page - and I have an AC adapter cord for the DC.
     
    ray, May 30, 2008
    #16
  17. Tony B

    Savant Guest

    Megapixels are really only relevant to the size you can output at
    without blowing up the image and manufacturing information. The image
    processor and chip are much more important in getting could clean
    photos.
    Best regards-

    http://www,brucekersten.com
    http://www.savantcreative.com
     
    Savant, May 31, 2008
    #17
  18. Tony B

    Wilson Guest


    It's interesting that the manufacturers have largely chosen megapixels to
    zero in on as the prime benefit of their new offerings. I can't
    specifically recall any camera advertisements featuring the camera's image
    processor and chip. Not being in the advertising business as you are, I can
    only guess this is because of the megapixel's scorecard appeal and the
    advertising focus on nothing more technical to understand than a number.
     
    Wilson, May 31, 2008
    #18
  19. Tony B

    Peter Guest

    I disagree.
    "Everything" depends on your intended use.
    There is a major difference between the D200 and the D300. The quantity of
    megapixels is irrelevant. The size and quality of the sensor is far more
    important. If you need it, the real time viewing can same a lot of wear and
    tear on your knees. The number of focus points and type of metering system,
    may, and I say may be important. None is meaningful if you are not using the
    features as an aid to get the type of images you want.

    There are cheap P & SO units today with 10 megapixels. A lot of folks may
    think these cheapies are fine and for them they may very well be.
     
    Peter, May 31, 2008
    #19
  20. Tony B

    Paul Furman Guest

    More like 30,000 frame for a D40, 100,000 for a D200.

    I dropped & smashed my D70 at 33,000 frames. Wore out my D200 shutter at
    80,000 in 2 years (doing time lapse movies & lots of banging around
    hiking & in the dirt) and the repair was $200 with the whole thing
    inspected, cleaned & other little parts replaced.
    I sold some parts on the D70 for someone to make an economic repair. The
    rear LCD is pretty easy to crack apparently.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jun 1, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.