The "Electronic Independence Level" of cameras.

The other day someone made a remark similar to "if you're going to invest in lenses, note that all electronic lenses will die". From this I began to think about which of my cameras I would keep if I wanted to have cameras that were the least reliant on electronics. I'm not saying that philosophy is reasonable - it's just a fun exercise. The only cameras I have that fit this requirement exactly are the Leica M3, Nikon F, the RB67, Hasselblad, and Fuji GW690III. However, since I often don't use a meter at all, I could include the Nikon F2 and the Speed Graphic (the only thing the battery is used for is the beam-focus).

It also made me wonder what the most recently manufactured totally mechanical camera is (other than large format)? I believe RB67 Pro SD's were available new until about ten years ago.

Then, this made me consider what the various Electronic Independence Levels (EIL) of cameras are. I thought of the following:

EIL 0 [no independence]
These cameras cannot function in any way without a battery. All digital cameras fall into this category. The more modern film cameras, such as the Canon EOS and Minolta Maxxum, fall into this category because film-wind, shutter speeds, and other operations are electronically controlled even though focus can be switched to manual. Nikons from the F4 onwards are here.

EIL 1 [little independence]
Although it is possible to use a camera in this category to make a photo without battery power, such use is severely restricted. With no battery power, the camera may have only one or a few fixed shutter speeds that can be used. Film could be advanced and rewound and apertures could be changed manually. One example of this is the Nikon F3.

EIL 2 [fair independence]
In this category, film-wind and shutter operation are manually done. Electronics are mostly for metering, but might with some cameras be used for aperture priority operation - however, manually set apertures are always possible. Lack of battery power is mostly just an inconvenience because the meter would not be used. Examples of this would be the Leica M6 or the Nikon FM3a and the F2 with metering heads. Note that even the F2 with the DE-1 non-metering prism still has a battery compartment in the body which gives testament to its electronic nature.

EIL 3 [good independence]
Cameras in this category have no battery at all but use something like selenium cells to control a meter needle. Typically, adjusting the shutter speed and aperture manually causes the needle to be centered or causes a second needle to match the first. Many cameras of the 1950's and 1960's fall into this category, such as the Voigtlander Bessamatic. In a camera of this type, are there any cameras where the needle is trapped and the trap position is used to set the aperture or shutter speed?

EIL 4 [total independence]
Cameras in this category where never designed to use any battery or electronics; they are fully functional without electricity. Many cameras from the 1950's and earlier fall into this category, as do most large format cameras and many medium format cameras. Examples here would be an Exakta VX, Leica M3, Hasselblad 500C, or the Nikon F. Yes, you can add electronic metering heads to the Nikon F, but the battery is in the head - the Nikon F of 1959 was designed as being totally mechanical.

Yes, I've ignored flash sync, but I never use flash - so it doesn't exist. Mostly I've done this exercise just for fun, seeing which cameras I have fit into which category.

Eventually everything will break but there's no reason why the electronics will break before something mechanical.


Steve.

Olympus OM-1, only requires a battery for the meter. There are other brands and models of similar ilk.

APUGuser19 said:

I have a Pentax ES that works perfectly. And if and when the electronics give out, it is irreparable, The electronic parts in cameras are proprietary and cannot be reproduced. Mechanical parts can always be fabricated. That's the difference. So, for this argument, the mechanicals are the longevity winners when all others have died.

Click to expand...

That argument sounds good, but in practice few will choose it when they see the bill for those custom parts. I've got a nice antique pocket watch that sits in a drawer for that reason. I've got an Agfa Silette that doesn't wind properly anymore. Who would pay to repair a Silette? I'd guess that most mechanical cameras, if parts are no longer available, will go unfixed.

Who needs a shutter electronic or mechanical. I still sometimes use a LF camera from the 1880's no shutter but it works. As for electronic vs mechanical primitive electronic circuits are often quiet reliable, some pure mechanical shutters not so much.

logic

Methinks a little logic should perhaps creep into your equation. You base you premise on "somebody said something" and now we're expected to get our knickers in a twist. I suspect there is more to it than how much electronics is involved. For example, quality of build, quality of materials. I had a hammer. No electronics. No moving parts. Rugged. It busted. I have a radio that is older than the hammer. It didn't busted. I suggest you need to get out more and stop blasting off into the heavens on every chance remark you hear. Having said that, I admit I perfer a camera without a battery. I don't like buying batteries all the time and I don't need a machine to tell me how to set my f-stop and shutter speed. In fact I resent it.

Thing is, well-made electronics have no reason to fail.

I've had precisely one camera with dead electrics, and rather more where the shutter mechanism had worn to the point that it wouldn't cock. Camera electronics are a solid state system, so barring mistreatment (such as leaving it in a damp garage with leaking batteries in) there's not much which physically can go wrong.

There are different levels of electronics in lenses too. The Pentax-A series work with electronic bodies, but the "program" contact is just a simple mechanical switch which pops a pin out at the back when you set it to A. The body "knows" the maximum aperture of the lens from this, as it grounds one of the multiple contacts on the lens mount. Use the lens on an MX or KX (don't set it to "A") and it's purely mechanical.

As for later lenses, I have a couple from around 1988 which show no signs of failure yet. A few more from the '90s which I'd also be quite happy to take out and shoot with for a day.

I can see the reasoning behind buying a mechanical camera body for hiking or expeditions, but I'm really not worried about longevity on my film gear. In fact I'm finding that the '80s and '90s AF lenses are more reliable than some of the latest ones!

The easy way to fix a camera is to find a cannibal, move the offending part or a sub assembly.

Or make a substitute if the reassembly is too difficult.

If the camera is a modern electrical one with integrated circuits and flexi rigid single piece wiring, please send it to someone else for repair.

Sover says if your F2 shutter blind cracks buy another, cheaper.

So it depended on the availability of parts and the cost of substitution.

Just in case My M4-2 was made well after 1952. Fully mechanical camera.

About reliability of well made electronics.
My XA VF exposure meter is gone and it is common case for those cameras.

Couple of weeks ago I went to "goodwill" store. To my surprise they have bunch of cameras. Two "new" fully mechanical P&S made in nineties. Nothing to break in them.
And one Nikon AF...has dead AF. And this is not the first case for me to have malfunctioning P&S made in Japan a.k.a. well-made comparing to "Made in China".

The problem with electronics in cameras is that they are mostly specific to that camera and that camera only. Sometimes a surface mount device or less miniaturized component can be substituted, but if the ICs die and a replacement isn't available, you're sunk.
Mechanical cameras rarely break parts, the two biggest causes of trouble are old lubricants and botched repairs. I'm fortunate in being able to fabricate pretty much any part I need to, so it's mechanical all the way for me. A few of my cameras have meters, but that's the only battery dependence I want.

I am going to shorten your label to EI-1 or EI-2 because its easier to say than EIL.
Where would you fit the Canon EF since half its shutter speeds are electronic and half are not?

I love my all-mechanical Pentax H1a, but I disagree somewhat with the premise that electronic parts will die before mechanical ones. When I bought my first car, my dad insisted that I not get auto windows or auto locks for the same reason as the OP's premise on lenses. Well, what do you think broke on that car? Yup, the driver window crank. I used to drive the MassPike to work from 128 into Boston and had to toss money in the toll booth. So for the last 6 months I had that car, I had to open the door to pay the toll - not fun. And on my next car, I had all the electronic gizmos. It got to the point where I could only unlock the driver door with the remote and not with the physical key.

No proof either way but I tend to think the electronic will last longer with use as there is little wear and tear. Without use I think they are the same.

winger said:

Well, what do you think broke on that car? Yup, the driver window crank. I used to drive the MassPike to work from 128 into Boston and had to toss money in the toll booth. So for the last 6 months I had that car, I had to open the door to pay the toll - not fun. And on my next car, I had all the electronic gizmos. It got to the point where I could only unlock the driver door with the remote and not with the physical key.

Click to expand...

That happened to the electric window on my Honda. Motor burned out. Expensive replacement part.

I'd guess for new cameras, the real issue will be the short product lifecycle-how long will manufacturers be willing to supply parts? For most mechanical cameras, no parts are being made new--either some repair guy has a stash of old stock, or parts are salvaged from even more broken units. Yes, regular maintenance helps keep things going. Some things can be made on a small scale--foam seals, converters for old batteries (light meters are one thing I don't worry about--I have no fear of never being able to get some kind of light meter). But eventually, if you use something enough, it will wear out beyond repair.

Theo Sulphate said:

Note that even the F2 with the DE-1 non-metering prism still has a battery compartment in the body which gives testament to its electronic nature.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, my Nikon F2 with no built-in light meter, an empty battery compartment, and a DE-1 non-metered viewfinder belongs in the EIL4 [total independence] category; not in the EIL2 [fair independence] category with a bunch of cameras that have built-in battery-dependent light meters.


https://flic.kr/p/8Xq7pi

narsuitus said:

In my opinion, my Nikon F2 with no built-in light meter, an empty battery compartment, and a DE-1 non-metered viewfinder belongs in the EIL4 [total independence] category
https://flic.kr/p/8Xq7pi

Click to expand...

I agree - and your F2 with DE-1 is beautiful.

trythis said:

I am going to shorten your label to EI-1 or EI-2 because its easier to say than EIL.
Where would you fit the Canon EF since half its shutter speeds are electronic and half are not?

Click to expand...

To me, the Canon EF is extremely nice - I could see someone having this as their only camera and being completely satisfied (I think benjiboy has one and is of that same opinion).

I'd say it's in category 2, since the battery is mostly for the meter. If you need the slower speeds and your battery is dead or something is wrong electrically, you can always use B.

Theo Sulphate said:

To me, the Canon EF is extremely nice - I could see someone having this as their only camera and being completely satisfied (I think benjiboy has one and is of that same opinion).

I'd say it's in category 2, since the battery is mostly for the meter. If you need the slower speeds and your battery is dead or something is wrong electrically, you can always use B.

Click to expand...

That's right I have an EF, and the Platinum hybrid Copal Square shutter of the Canon EF was further developed into the Titanium Hybrid shutter in the Canon New F1 that like the EF also works happily on all the fast shutter speeds without a battery from 125/sec to 1/2000 sec http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/canonf1n/shutter/index.htm

You must be young. I hope I last as long as my equipment.

Alan Klein said:

You must be young. I hope I last as long as my equipment.

Click to expand...

Well, if I were a dog, I'd be almost 9 years old. Still, I have a few all-mechanical cameras from the early 50's which are fully functional.

Theo Sulphate said:

, note that all [fill in the blank] will die".y.

Click to expand...

The older one gets, the less one worries of these things.

Most all the cameras and lenses I own and cherished in the 1970s and 1980s still function fine. The thing is that I could go out today and buy a hundred more better working cameras in all formats without any problem. I don't see there being any shortage of cameras or lenses in my lifetime.

ic-racer said:

The older one gets, the less one worries of these things.

Most all the cameras and lenses I own and cherished in the 1970s and 1980s still function fine. The thing is that I could go out today and buy a hundred more better working cameras in all formats without any problem. I don't see there being any shortage of cameras or lenses in my lifetime.

Click to expand...

I'm 76 I don't worry about my cameras and lenses packing up, I'm just happy to still have all my faculties am in good health and still able to enjoy using them.

benjiboy said:

I'm 76 I don't worry about my cameras and lenses packing up, I'm just happy to still have all my faculties be in good health and still able to enjoy using them.

Click to expand...

+1

Chan Tran said:

No proof either way but I tend to think the electronic will last longer with use as there is little wear and tear. Without use I think they are the same.

Click to expand...

Capacitors can fail, resistors can fail, copper or other conductive metals can corrode. There are all sorts of failure modes for electrical components, even without moving parts. Just look at all the Contax G2 cameras at KEH labeled LCD bleed.

snapguy said:

Methinks a little logic should perhaps creep into your equation. You base you premise on "somebody said something" and now we're expected to get our knickers in a twist. I suspect there is more to it than how much electronics is involved. For example, quality of build, quality of materials. I had a hammer. No electronics. No moving parts. Rugged. It busted. I have a radio that is older than the hammer. It didn't busted. I suggest you need to get out more and stop blasting off into the heavens on every chance remark you hear. Having said that, I admit I perfer a camera without a battery. I don't like buying batteries all the time and I don't need a machine to tell me how to set my f-stop and shutter speed. In fact I resent it.

Click to expand...

Did you read the same post I did?

No one's knickers are in a twist and I saw no blasting off anywhere just a rather fun thought exercise. Don't like it, don't play.

My Pentax MX is fine without a battery (just meter less) and also my Yashicamat 124. Of course my 4x5 Technika.

My Pentax LX has a fairly useful range of mechanical speeds but is still pretty crippled without a battery.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.