Andrej From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 1101 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3226 times:
I am wondering on durability of digital cameras. I am using Canon T70, which is 20 years old, and until this date I had no problems with it. Now, mind you I am not profesional photographer and I use my camera often, usually outside, with good lighting conditions. I have couple of friends who have cameras that are 30+ year old, and they still go strong.
Now, this had me wondering if digital cameras, (such as Nikkon D100,D70, Canon 300D, 10D, D60, etc.) can last for 15+ years without any difficulties. If owner takes good care of his/hers camera.
2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3186 times:
Quality wise I believe that with basic maintenance they will last. More the issue with digital is the rapid pace of the technology. Obviously the camera will be "obsolete" (in terms of current technology available) very quickly.
I still have my Dad's old Adams 35mm range finder camera. Dates from the late 50's. Totally mechanical, no batteries needed and it still works fine. Technically it is totally outdated, but it still works. Will my kid have my 10D 40 years from now?
AndersNilsson From Sweden, joined May 2004, 419 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3132 times:
Digital cameras can probably be used for very long time. One of the problems with digital cameras is they get outdated very fast. New professional film cameras used to arrive every five years but new professional digital cameras
arrive more often and get more and more megapixels and speed.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 789 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3068 times:
I've not seen anything to indicate the sensor's deteriorate over time, and as there's no moving parts, I don't see why this shouldn't last. I do believe LCD panels can deteriorate over time, but this can be replaced.
The biggest problem is most DSLRs simply get used more than their film counterparts - in my case by a factor of 10. And as the shutter is probably the most critical mechanical part, this usage will mean aging is accelerated.
When I bought a D30, I read that Canon tested the shutter for 30K actuations. I thought "well, that will last a while". Turns out I shot 30k frames in just over a year. Last July alone I shot 10k frames. Eventually most shutters will wear out, and the elapsed time before this happens is going to be shorter than for a more lightly used film camera.
Couple this to the rapid devaluation of old models, and the effective lifespan of a DSLR is going to be shorter than a film camera. Already I suspect it must be close to uneconomic to replace a shutter on a D30 (ie. makes more sense to replace the camera). I figure on a working life of a well used DSLR to be, say 5 years.
Rotor1 From Tajikistan, joined Mar 2003, 230 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3046 times:
There are still loads of Nikon D1s running around these days, 5+ years into their existance. Hell, even the old Kodak bigbodies are still fetching good prices and there are plenty in working order, dating back to the early 90's. I'm sure that a CCD/CMOS sensor is no worse for wear than a motor drive or film handling mechanism. The shutter will be the death for any camera.
"Will my kid have my 10D 40 years from now?"
No, I will.
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net